Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachment 8N - PDP SWQMPO T AY R I V E R S W E E T W A T E R R I V E R H S T J S T L S T MAIN ST P A L O M A R S T I S T E S T O L Y M P I C P W F S T SR-125 TOLL ROAD T H I R D A V G S T I-805 FREEWAY I - 5 FR E E WAY OTAY L A K E S R D B R O A D W A Y H U N T E P W S R -5 4 F R E E W A Y H I L L T O P D R N A P L E S S T B O N I T A R D S E C O N D A V ORANGE AV E A S T L A K E P W F I R S T A V TELEG RA P H C ANYON RD C S T C O R R A L C A N Y O N R D L A N E A V PROC TO R VA L L EY RD M A R I N A PW BUEN A VIST A W Y R A N C H OD E L R E Y P W C E N T R A L A V B E Y E R B L P L A Z A B O NIT A R D MOUNT MI G U E L R D H E R I T A G E R D TERR A N O V A D R L A G O O N D R 3 0 T H S T S R -5 4 F R E E W A Y S R - 1 2 5 T O L L R O A D I - 8 0 5 F R E E W A Y I - 5 F R E E W A Y H S T J S T L S T MAIN ST P ALOM A R ST O L Y M P I C P W S R - 1 2 5 T OLL ROAD I-805 FREEWAY I - 5 F R E E W A Y O T A Y L A K E S R D B R O A D W A Y S R -5 4 F R E E W A Y B O N I T A R D TELEGRAPH CANY O N R D I - 5 F R E E W A Y PALM I J W U E ST E S W E E T W A TER 3 0 T H H U N T E M A X G D T IM DENN E R Y P A R K ACACIA F I G A W O O D S S A N M I G U E L M A G D A L E N A ALTA P R O C T ORVALL E Y G O T H A M OTAY L A K E S S U R R E Y LONESTAR CLU B H O USE Y A L E D E G E N 3 2 N D O N E I D A C O A S T AL HILL S W I NNET K A HOLLISTER CAMI N O ELEVADO ENERGY OC E A N H I L L S SEQ U O I A VALLEY C R E E K S I D E L O R I B A Y SATURN VIA MAGGIORE PR A Y JO NE L S Y L V I A R I V E R A P E R S H I N G BYRD G R E ENSVI E W 19TH T A B E R 2 7 T H M Y R A B B R I A R W O O D C A LM A T E R M I N A L S I P E S A V E N I D A D ELAS VISTAS DAVIES V A L L E Y V I S T A LYNW O O D H E R I T A G E A B E TO S T E I N E R LINDBERGH CAMINO D E L S O L L I L A C O R A N G E L A K E C R E S T IRWIN CHATEAU R E D L A N D S O W E N MAXWELL S T O N E G A T E P A L O T O P S A I L D E N N I S CRESTVI E W O A K S P R I N G S MILLER OLIVE 2 8 T H G R A N G E R MESA D U F F Y CITRUS JONEL D D P R O C T O R V A L LEY PALM M O R G A N H I L L F I R S T S A N TA LUCIA L I O N E G R E T Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend Exempt_Systems Exempt_Bodies SWMains Creeks River CityLimit Receiving Waters and Conveyance Systems Exempt from Hydromodification Management Requirements September, 2018 ±0 1 2 3 40.5 Miles DMA Exhibit Attachment 1A D s V s V s V V FH FH V s s s V V V s S D 12"TD G C D D DD D D S W 12"TP 12"TP G 24"TD 230 2 3 0 23 0 220 220 22 0 22 0 220 220 220 220 220220 220 2 2 0 22 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 220 22 0 21 0 2 1 0 21 0 210 210 210 210 21 0 2 1 0 210 21 0 2 1 0 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 200 200 20 0 200 20 0 2 0 0 20 0 200 200 200 200 20 0 20 0 20 0 200 2 0 0 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 20 0 2 0 0 20 0 20 0 2 0 0 190 19 0 19 0 19 0 190190 190 190 19 0 190 1 9 0 190190 1 9 0 1 9 0 1 9 0 190 190190 190 190 190 190 190190 1 9 0 190 190 190 190 180 1 8 0 180 180 18 0 1 8 0 180 180180 180180 180 180 18 0 1 8 0 1 8 0 180 1 8 0 180 180 180 180 180 18 0 180 180 180 18 0 180 180 180 180 180 180 1 8 0 180 17 0 170 170 170 1 7 0 17 0 17 0 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 17 0 1 7 0 170 170 170 170 1 7 0 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 17 0 160 1 6 0 1 6 0 160 1 6 0 160 1 6 0 16 0 16 0 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 16 0 1 6 0 1 6 0 160 160 16 0 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 16 0 16 0 150 150 15 0 15 0 1 5 0 1 5 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 1 5 0 1 5 0 150 15 0 15 0 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 1 5 0 150 140 140 1 4 0 14 0 14 0 1 4 0 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 14 0 140 14 0 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 14 0 140 140 140 130 130 130 130 130130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 13013 0 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 120 S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S W W F F F G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F F F F F F F F F F W W W W W F F F F F F F F F F F W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F FWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W WW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W F F F F T T T T DMA A DMA E S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S W W F F F G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F F F F F F F F F F W W W W W F F F F F F F F F F F W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F FWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W WW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W F F F F DMA C MAIN STREET NI R V A N A A V E INDUSTRIALBLDG 4187.5 FF INDUSTRIALBLDG 3186.5 FF INDUSTRIALBLDG 2185.25 FF INDUSTRIALBLDG 1184.25 FF DMA B DMA HDMA G DMA D DMA F 182 183 183 184 182 183 184 183 184 183 184 185 186 186 186 185 186 185 186 186 186 185 1 8 6 187 187 186 1 8 6 18 7 186 1 8 6 186 186186186186 1 8 6 185 184 184 185 184 184 183 184 18 4 1 8 3 1 8 2 1 8 1 182 183 18 1 1 8 4 18 5 185 18 6 18 4 18 7 185 182 184 1 8 1 1 8 4 1 8 1 1 8 4 187 190 189 190 195 200 205 205 205 205 200 195 190 185 18 0 180 205 210 210205 215 215 220 215 220 215 215 210 205 200195 185 18 5 135 135 138 140 138 140 145 135 140145 150 191 180 170 150 18 0 175 20 0 190 145 135 137 136 134 132 139 138 137 155 1 8 0 160 1 8 7 R/W C/L R/W R/W C/L R/W P / L P/LP/L P/L R/W C/L R/W R/W C/L R/W 24" HDPE INFLOW SD 176.50 IE IN INSTALL TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE 18" HDPE INFLOW SD 176.50 IE IN INSTALL TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE 3"-DIA LOW-FLOW ORIFICE TO MODULAR WETLAND 175.50 IE OUT 18" OUTLET PIPE TO BYPASS HIGH FLOWS 175.50 IE OUT 24" HDPE INFLOW SD 170.50 IE IN INSTALL TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCHPROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH SC-M LOADING DOCKS SC-M LOADING DOCKS SC-M LOADING DOCKS SC-M LOADING DOCKS SC-M LOADING DOCKS 3"-DIA LOW-FLOW ORIFICE TO MODULAR WETLAND 170.50 IE OUT 24" OUTLET PIPE TO BYPASS HIGH FLOWS 170.50 IE OUT EXIST. 72" CSP SD PER DWG NO. 75-98D TO REMAIN EXIST. 54" CSP SD PER DWG NO. 75-101D & 75-97D TO REMAIN EXIST. 2-48" RCP SD PER DWG NO. 92-160 EXIST. 3-48" RCP SD @ 1.6% PER DWG NO. 94-103 EXIST. 18" RCP SD PER DWG NO. 94-109APOC-4 EXIST. B-2 CURB INLET PER DWG NO. 94-110A POC-3 EXIST. B-2 CURB INLET POC-1 (129.3 FL) POC-2 (130.6 FL) EXIST. 54" CSP SD PER DWG NO. 75-101D & 75-97D TO BE REMOVED (128.05 FL) BMP-B1 STORMTRAP SINGLE TRAP A=3,500 SF H=5.67 FT V=19,845 CF BMP-A5 TREE WELL TO MEET VOLUME RETENTION A=271 SF V=1,084 CF BMP-A4 TREE WELL TO MEET VOLUME RETENTION A=284 SF V=1,136 CF BMP-B2 MODULAR WETLAND MWS-L-8-20 BMP-B4 TREE WELL TO MEET VOLUME RETENTION A=439 SF V=1,756 CF EXIST. 6'x2.5' DOUBLE RCB PER DWG NO. 02025 BMP-A2 MODULAR WETLAND MWS-L-8-20 BMP-A1 STORMTRAP DOUBLE TRAP A=2,700 SF H=7.5 FT V=20,250 CF SD-5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD-5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD-5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD-4 MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION (TYPICAL FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS) SD-7 LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES (TYPICAL FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS) SD-3 MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA (DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING LOTS ARE CONSTRUCTED TO MINIMUM WIDTHS NECESSARY SD-3 MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA (DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING LOTS ARE CONSTRUCTED TO MINIMUM WIDTHS NECESSARY 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-5, SC-G REFUSE AREA SC-5, SC-G REFUSE AREA SC-5, SC-G REFUSE AREA 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-7 LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES (TYPICAL FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS) SD-3 MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA (DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING LOTS ARE CONSTRUCTED TO MINIMUM WIDTHS NECESSARY SC-5, SC-G REFUSE AREA SC-5, SC-G REFUSE AREA SC-5, SC-G REFUSE AREASC-5, SC-G REFUSE AREA 2 1 2 1 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" MULCH LAYERWIDTH 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 SYSTEMSPECIFICATIONS SECTION B-3. ROOT BALL COMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTED SUBGRADE UNCOMPACTED SUBGRADE STREET FLOW DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA EXHIBIT NIRVANA BUSINESS PARK 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CA PLSA JOB NO. 3668 MARCH 2022 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 DIRECTION OF FLOW PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA:13.31 AC PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA: 14.11 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA:9.75 AC PROPOSED PERVIOUS / LANDSCAPE AREA:4.37 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 NIRVANA BUSINESS PARK, VWP-OP NIRVANA OWNER, LLC" DATED MARCH 2022. CCSYAS 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 = 215 CU. FT. SITE DESIGN BMP USED: BMP-A4, TREE WELL W/ UNDERDRAIN TCV = 114 CU. FT. SOIL AREA = 284 SQ. FT. SOIL VOLUME (SV) = 1,136 CU. FT. SITE DESIGN BMP USED: BMP-A5, TREE WELL W/ UNDERDRAIN TCV = 108 CU. FT. SOIL AREA = 271 SQ. FT. SOIL VOLUME (SV) = 1,084 CU. FT. SUM OF VOLUME RETENTION BENEFITS = 222 CU. FT. DMA-B: TARGET VOLUME RETENTION = 174 CU. FT. SITE DESIGN BMP USED: BMP-B4, TREE WELL W/ UNDERDRAIN TCV = 176 CU. FT. SOIL AREA = 439 SQ. FT. SOIL VOLUME (SV) = 1,756 CU. FT. SUM OF VOLUME RETENTION BENEFITS = 176 CU. FT. SEE DETAIL 'A' THIS SHEET FOR TYPICAL TREE WELL DETAIL SUMMARY OF DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREAS DMA IMPERVIOUS AREA (AC)% IMP DMA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, C TREATED BY (BMP ID) DMA-A 5.38 82.8%0.76 DRAINAGE AREA (AC) 6.49 DMA-B 4.37 83.7%5.22 DMA-C 0.00 0%0.58 DMA-D 0.00 0%0.42 BMP-A2, MWS-L-8-20 POLLUTANT CONTROL TYPE PROPRIETARY BIOFILTRATION (BF-3) N/A - SELF-MITIGATING - - N/A - SELF-MITIGATING - - DMA-E 0.00 0%0.40 - - - - - - - - 0.77 BMP-B2, MWS-L-8-20 PROPRIETARY BIOFILTRATION (BF-3) N/A - SELF-MITIGATING DMA-F 0.00 0%0.09 - -- -N/A - SELF-MITIGATING INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES NOTE ALL PROCESS ACTIVITIES TO BE PERFORMED INDOORS. NO PROCESSES TO DRAIN TO EXTERIOR OR TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. REQUIRED TREATMENT VOLUME (CU.FT.) 7,941 - - - - - - 6,447 - - DCV (CU.FT.) 9,343 - - - - - - - - 7,585 DMA-H - -- -N/A - SELF-MITIGATING TOTAL 9.75 69.6%14.00 0.66 - -- - 16,928 NOTE: REQUIRED TREATMENT VOLUME BASED ON DRAWDOWN TIME OF UPSTREAM STORAGE UNIT PER TABLE B.5-5 OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA BMP DESIGN MANUAL. SINCE THE DRAWDOWN TIME OF THE UPSTREAM STORAGE UNITS (BMP-A1 AND BMP-B1) IS 12 HOURS, THE REQUIRED TREATMENT VOLUME IS 0.85 TIMES THE DCV. DMA-G - -- -N/A - SELF-MITIGATING - -- -0.00 0% 0.00 0% 0.31 0.48 DMA Summary Attachment 1B Harvest and Use Feasibility (Form I-7) Attachment 1C Infiltration Feasibility Attachment 1D BMP Design Worksheets Attachment 1E Project Name BMP ID 1 282662 sq. ft. 2 0.7628 3 0.52 inches 4 9343 cu. ft. 5 0 in/hr. 6 2 7 0 in/hr. 10 215 cu. ft. Area draining to the BMP Nirvana Business Park BMP-A2 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% 3/10/2022 Version 1.0 - June 2017 Project Name BMP ID 1 282,662 sq. ft. 2 0.7628 3 215614.5736 sq. ft. 4 9343 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 7941.803461 cu. ft. 12 8100 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 Nirvana Business Park BMP-A2 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 3/10/2022 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] 215 Nirvana Business Park BMP-A2 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.) 215615 6468 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 282662 0.7628 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]214.8958584 114 108 Volume Retention Performance Standard is Met Site Design BMP Is Line 11 ≥ Line 4?No, Proceed to Line 13 CreditSite Design Type 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. 222 16 (1) Tree Well w/ Underdrain (Area=284 sq-ft, SV=1,136 cu-ft) (1) Tree Well w/ Underdrain (Area=271 sq-ft, SV=1,084 cu-ft) Is Line 16 ≥ Line 15? 3/10/2022 Version 1.0 - June 2017 Vault Drawdown Calculation - BMP-A1 Project Name Nirvana Business Park Vault Dimensions PLSA Project No. 3668 Vault Volume 20,250 cf Vault Drawdown 11.7 hrs Chamber Height 7.5 ft Vault Area 2,700 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) 3.00 8100 0.403 0.00 0.00 2.50 6750 0.367 0.97 0.97 2.25 6075 0.348 0.52 1.50 2.00 5400 0.327 0.56 2.05 1.75 4725 0.305 0.59 2.65 1.50 4050 0.281 0.64 3.29 1.25 3375 0.255 0.70 3.99 1.00 2700 0.226 0.78 4.76 0.75 2025 0.193 0.89 5.66 0.50 1350 0.152 1.09 6.75 0.00 0 0.00 4.92 11.66 Storage Unit Requirement 9,343 7,941 8,100 yesIs storage requirement met? Underdrain Orifice Diameter: 3 in DCV 0.85DCV Storage provided in the design Project Name BMP ID 1 227431 sq. ft. 2 0.7696 3 0.52 inches 4 7585 cu. ft. 5 0 in/hr. 6 2 7 0 in/hr. 10 174 cu. ft. 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% 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)] Area draining to the BMP Nirvana Business Park BMP-B2 Sizing Method for Volume Retention Criteria Worksheet B.5-2 3/10/2022 Version 1.0 - June 2017 Project Name BMP ID 1 227,431 sq. ft. 2 0.7696 3 175030.8976 sq. ft. 4 7585 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 6446.971395 cu. ft. 12 7000 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. 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 Nirvana Business Park BMP-B2 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 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 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) 3/10/2022 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 Volume Retention Performance Standard is Met Site Design BMP Is Line 11 ≥ Line 4?No, Proceed to Line 13 CreditSite Design Type 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. 176 16 (1) Tree Well w/ Underdrain (Area=439 sq-ft, SV=1,756 cu-ft) Is Line 16 ≥ Line 15? Volume retention required from other site design BMPs [(1-Line 13) x Line 14]174.4474613 176 Volume Retention for No Infiltration Condition Worksheet B.5-6 227431 0.7696 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] 174 Nirvana Business Park BMP-B2 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.) 175031 5251 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 3/10/2022 Version 1.0 - June 2017 Vault Drawdown Calculation - BMP-B1 Project Name Nirvana Business Park Vault Dimensions PLSA Project No. 3668 Vault Volume 19,845 cf Vault Drawdown 12.5 hrs Chamber Height 5.67 ft Vault Area 3,500 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 7000 0.327 0.00 0.00 1.75 6125 0.305 0.77 0.77 1.50 5250 0.281 0.83 1.60 1.25 4375 0.255 0.91 2.50 1.00 3500 0.226 1.01 3.51 0.75 2625 0.193 1.16 4.67 0.50 1750 0.152 1.41 6.08 0.00 0 0.00 6.38 12.46 Storage Unit Requirement 7,585 6,447 7,000 yesIs storage requirement met? Underdrain Orifice Diameter: 3 in DCV 0.85DCV Storage provided in the design 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. Above Space for Recorder’s Use No Fee Required. CCV File No. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH GRANT OF ACCESS AND COVENANTS CHULA HEIGHTS COMMERCE PARK THIS STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), dated _____ _____, 2021 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 VWP-OP Nirvana Owner, LLC, (“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) filed a Tentative Map and applied for a Grading Permit for the development of Chula Heights Commerce Park (“Project”), located on Parcel 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 21587 and a portion of Lot 2, Sec 20, T18S, R1E San Bernadino Meridian of ROS 16999, “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 of y), 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 Rev April 2016 Page 2 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 3 of 13 “Project” means all improvements and land dedicated to the development, which is the subject of Agreement, 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 servicing 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 4 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 5 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 of Security. 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 6 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 7 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 of the 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. 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 Rev April 2016 Page 8 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 9 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 provisions 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 10 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 of whether 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 of the 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 of the 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 11 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 of which 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 12 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 13 of 13 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH GRANT OF ACCESS AND COVENANTS 750 MAIN STREET IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day of , 2021. OWNER: CITY OF CHULA VISTA: City Engineer VWP-OP Nirvana Owner, LLC By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Its: City Attorney By: Its: ATTEST: City Clerk Dated: (Notary to attach acknowledgment for each signature.) (Corporate Authority required for each Signatory, if applicable.) 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 EXHIBIT D SD-1 Tree Wells BMP MAINTENANCE FACT SHEET FOR SITE DESIGN BMP 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 SD-1 Tree Wells Other Special Considerations 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 SD-1 Tree Wells SUMMARY OF STANDARD INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE FOR SD-1 TREE WELLS The property owner is responsible to ensure inspection, operation and maintenance of permanent BMPs on their property unless responsibility has been formally transferred to an agency, community facilities district, homeowners association, property owners association, or other special district. Maintenance frequencies listed in this table are average/typical frequencies. Actual maintenance needs are site-specific, and maintenance may be required more frequently. Maintenance must be performed whenever needed, based on maintenance indicators presented in this table. The BMP owner is responsible for conducting regular inspections to see when maintenance is needed based on the maintenance indicators. During the first year of operation of a structural BMP, inspection is recommended at least once prior to August 31 and then monthly from September through May. Inspection during a storm event is also recommended. After the initial period of frequent inspections, the minimum inspection and maintenance frequency can be determined based on the results of the first year inspections. Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency Tree health Routine actions as necessary to maintain tree health. • Inspect monthly. • Maintenance when needed. Dead or diseased tree Remove dead or diseased tree. Replace per original plans. • Inspect monthly. • Maintenance when needed. Standing water in tree well for longer than 24 hours following a storm event Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to tree health Loosen or replace soils surrounding the tree to restore drainage. • Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger storm event. If standing water is observed, increase inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger storm event. • Maintenance when needed. Presence of mosquitos/larvae For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and adult mosquitos, see http://www.mosquito.org/biology Disperse any standing water from the tree well to nearby landscaping. Loosen or replace soils surrounding the tree to restore drainage (and prevent standing water). • Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger storm event. If mosquitos are observed, increase inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger storm event. • Maintenance when needed Entrance / opening to the tree well is blocked such that storm water will not drain 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 is filled such that runoff drains away from the tree well) Make repairs as appropriate to restore drainage into the tree well. • Inspect monthly. • Maintenance when needed. SD-1 Page 3 of 6 January 12, 2017 SD-1 Tree Wells References American Mosquito Control Association. http://www.mosquito.org/ County of San Diego. 2014. Low Impact Development Handbook. http://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/watersheds/susmp/lid.html San Diego County Copermittees. 2016. Model BMP Design Manual, Appendix E, Fact Sheet SD-1. http://www.projectcleanwater.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=250&Itemid=220 SD-1 Page 4 of 6 January 12, 2017 SD-1 Tree Wells Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.: Permit No.: APN(s): Property / Development Name: Responsible Party Name and Phone Number: Property Address of BMP: Responsible Party Address: INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR SD-1 TREE WELLS PAGE 1 of 2 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Dead or diseased tree Maintenance Needed? ☐ YES ☐ NO ☐ N/A ☐ Remove dead or diseased tree ☐ Replace per original plans ☐ Other / Comments: Standing water in tree well for longer than 24 hours following a storm event Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to tree health Maintenance Needed? ☐ YES ☐ NO ☐ N/A ☐ Loosen or replace soils surrounding the tree to restore drainage ☐ Other / Comments: SD-1 Page 5 of 6 January 12, 2017 SD-1 Tree Wells Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.: Permit No.: APN(s): INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR SD-1 TREE WELLS PAGE 2 of 2 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Presence of mosquitos/larvae For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and adult mosquitos, see http://www.mosquito.org/biology Maintenance Needed? ☐ YES ☐ NO ☐ N/A ☐ Disperse any standing water from the tree well to nearby landscaping ☐ Loosen or replace soils surrounding the tree to restore drainage (and prevent standing water) ☐ Other / Comments: Entrance / opening to the tree well is blocked such that storm water will not drain 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 is filled such that runoff drains away from the tree well) Maintenance Needed? ☐ YES ☐ NO ☐ N/A ☐ Make repairs as appropriate to restore drainage into the tree well ☐ Other / Comments: SD-1 Page 6 of 6 January 12, 2017 www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Guidelines for Modular Wetland System - Linear Maintenance Summary o Remove Trash from Screening Device – average maintenance interval is 6 to 12 months.  (5 minute average service time). o Remove Sediment from Separation Chamber – average maintenance interval is 12 to 24 months.  (10 minute average service time). o Replace Cartridge Filter Media – average maintenance interval 12 to 24 months.  (10-15 minute per cartridge average service time). o Replace Drain Down Filter Media – average maintenance interval is 12 to 24 months.  (5 minute average service time). o Trim Vegetation – average maintenance interval is 6 to 12 months.  (Service time varies). System Diagram Access to screening device, separation chamber and cartridge filter Access to drain down filter Pre-Treatment Chamber Biofiltration Chamber Discharge Chamber Outflow Pipe Inflow Pipe (optional) www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Procedures Screening Device 1. Remove grate or manhole cover to gain access to the screening device in the Pre- Treatment Chamber. Vault type units do not have screening device. Maintenance can be performed without entry. 2. Remove all pollutants collected by the screening device. Removal can be done manually or with the use of a vacuum truck. The hose of the vacuum truck will not damage the screening device. 3. Screening device can easily be removed from the Pre-Treatment Chamber to gain access to separation chamber and media filters below. Replace grate or manhole cover when completed. Separation Chamber 1. Perform maintenance procedures of screening device listed above before maintaining the separation chamber. 2. With a pressure washer spray down pollutants accumulated on walls and cartridge filters. 3. Vacuum out Separation Chamber and remove all accumulated pollutants. Replace screening device, grate or manhole cover when completed. Cartridge Filters 1. Perform maintenance procedures on screening device and separation chamber before maintaining cartridge filters. 2. Enter separation chamber. 3. Unscrew the two bolts holding the lid on each cartridge filter and remove lid. 4. Remove each of 4 to 8 media cages holding the media in place. 5. Spray down the cartridge filter to remove any accumulated pollutants. 6. Vacuum out old media and accumulated pollutants. 7. Reinstall media cages and fill with new media from manufacturer or outside supplier. Manufacturer will provide specification of media and sources to purchase. 8. Replace the lid and tighten down bolts. Replace screening device, grate or manhole cover when completed. Drain Down Filter 1. Remove hatch or manhole cover over discharge chamber and enter chamber. 2. Unlock and lift drain down filter housing and remove old media block. Replace with new media block. Lower drain down filter housing and lock into place. 3. Exit chamber and replace hatch or manhole cover. www.modularwetlands.com 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 Maintenance Procedure Illustration Screening Device The screening device is located directly under the manhole or grate over the Pre-Treatment Chamber. It’s mounted directly underneath for easy access and cleaning. Device can be cleaned by hand or with a vacuum truck. Separation Chamber The separation chamber is located directly beneath the screening device. It can be quickly cleaned using a vacuum truck or by hand. A pressure washer is useful to assist in the cleaning process. www.modularwetlands.com Cartridge Filters The cartridge filters are located in the Pre-Treatment chamber connected to the wall adjacent to the biofiltration chamber. The cartridges have removable tops to access the individual media filters. Once the cartridge is open media can be easily removed and replaced by hand or a vacuum truck. Drain Down Filter The drain down filter is located in the Discharge Chamber. The drain filter unlocks from the wall mount and hinges up. Remove filter block and replace with new block. www.modularwetlands.com Trim Vegetation Vegetation should be maintained in the same manner as surrounding vegetation and trimmed as needed. No fertilizer shall be used on the plants. Irrigation per the recommendation of the manufacturer and or landscape architect. Different types of vegetation requires different amounts of irrigation. www.modularwetlands.com Inspection Form Modular Wetland System, Inc. P. 760.433-7640 F. 760-433-3176 E. Info@modularwetlands.com For Office Use Only (city) (Zip Code)(Reviewed By) Owner / Management Company (Date) Contact Phone ( )_ Inspector Name Date / / Time AM / PM Weather Condition Additional Notes Yes Depth: Yes No Modular Wetland System Type (Curb, Grate or UG Vault):Size (22', 14' or etc.): Other Inspection Items: Storm Event in Last 72-hours? No Yes Type of Inspection Routine Follow Up Complaint Storm Office personnel to complete section to the left. 2972 San Luis Rey Road, Oceanside, CA 92058 P (760) 433-7640 F (760) 433-3176 Inspection Report Modular Wetlands System Is the filter insert (if applicable) at capacity and/or is there an accumulation of debris/trash on the shelf system? Does the cartridge filter media need replacement in pre-treatment chamber and/or discharge chamber? Any signs of improper functioning in the discharge chamber? Note issues in comments section. Chamber: Is the inlet/outlet pipe or drain down pipe damaged or otherwise not functioning properly? Structural Integrity: Working Condition: Is there evidence of illicit discharge or excessive oil, grease, or other automobile fluids entering and clogging the unit? Is there standing water in inappropriate areas after a dry period? Damage to pre-treatment access cover (manhole cover/grate) or cannot be opened using normal lifting pressure? Damage to discharge chamber access cover (manhole cover/grate) or cannot be opened using normal lifting pressure? Does the MWS unit show signs of structural deterioration (cracks in the wall, damage to frame)? Project Name Project Address Inspection Checklist CommentsNo Does the depth of sediment/trash/debris suggest a blockage of the inflow pipe, bypass or cartridge filter? If yes, specify which one in the comments section. Note depth of accumulation in in pre-treatment chamber. Is there a septic or foul odor coming from inside the system? Is there an accumulation of sediment/trash/debris in the wetland media (if applicable)? Is it evident that the plants are alive and healthy (if applicable)? Please note Plant Information below. Sediment / Silt / Clay Trash / Bags / Bottles Green Waste / Leaves / Foliage Waste:Plant Information No Cleaning Needed Recommended Maintenance Additional Notes: Damage to Plants Plant Replacement Plant Trimming Schedule Maintenance as Planned Needs Immediate Maintenance www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Report Modular Wetland System, Inc. P. 760.433-7640 F. 760-433-3176 E. Info@modularwetlands.com For Office Use Only (city) (Zip Code)(Reviewed By) Owner / Management Company (Date) Contact Phone ( )_ Inspector Name Date / / Time AM / PM Weather Condition Additional Notes Site Map # Comments: 2972 San Luis Rey Road, Oceanside, CA 92058 P. 760.433.7640 F. 760.433.3176 Inlet and Outlet Pipe Condition Drain Down Pipe Condition Discharge Chamber Condition Drain Down Media Condition Plant Condition Media Filter Condition Long: MWS Sedimentation Basin Total Debris Accumulation Condition of Media 25/50/75/100 (will be changed @ 75%) Operational Per Manufactures' Specifications (If not, why?) Lat:MWS Catch Basins GPS Coordinates of Insert Manufacturer / Description / Sizing Trash Accumulation Foliage Accumulation Sediment Accumulation Type of Inspection Routine Follow Up Complaint Storm Storm Event in Last 72-hours? No Yes Office personnel to complete section to the left. Project Address Project Name Cleaning and Maintenance Report Modular Wetlands System STORMTRAP MAINTENANCE MANUAL 1. Introduction Regular inspections are recommended to ensure that the sys tem is functioning as designed. Please call your Authorized StormTrap Representative if you have questions in regards to the inspection and maintenance of the StormTrap system. Prior to entry into any underground storm sewer or underground detention systems, appropriate OSHA a nd local safety regulations and guidelines should be followed. 2. Inspection Schedules for Municipalities StormTrap Stormwater Management Systems are recommen ded for inspection whenever the upstream and downstream catch basins and stormwater pipes of the stormwater collection system are inspected or maintained. This will economize the cost of the inspection if it is done at the same time the Municipal crews are visiting the area. 3. Inspection Schedules for Private Development StormTrap Stormwater Mangement Systems, for a private d evelopment, are recommended for inspection after each major storm water event. At a minimum, until a cleaning schedule can be established, an annual inspection is recommended. If in spected on an annual basis, the inspection should be conducted before the stormwater season begins to be sure that everything is functioning properly for the upcoming storm season. 4. Inspection Process Inspections should be done such that at least 2-3 days has lapsed since the most recent rain event to allow for draining. Visually inspect the system at all manhole locations. Utilizing a sediment pole, measure and document the amount of silt at each manhole location (Figure 1). Inspect each pipe opening to ensure that the silt level or any forei gn objects are not blocking the pipes. Be sure to inspect the outlet pipe(s) because this is typically the smallest pipe in the system. It is common that most of the larger materials will be coll ected upstream of the system in catch basins, and it is therefore important at time of inspections to check these structures for large trash or blockages. Remove any blockages if you can during the inspection process only if you can do so safely from the top of the system without entering into the system. Do not go into the system under any circumstances without proper ventilation equipment and training. Pass any information requiring action onto the appropriate maintenance personnel if you c annot remove the blockages from above during the inspection process. Be sure to describe the location of each manhole and the type of material that needs to be removed. The sediment level of the system should also be measured and recorded during the inspection process. Recording the sediment level at each manhole is very i mportant in order get a history of sediment that can be graphed over time (i.e. years) in order to estimate when the system will need to be maintained next. It is also important to keep these record s to verify that the inspection process was actually performed if anyone asks for your records in the future. The sediment level in the underground detention system can be determined from the outside of the system by opening up all the manholes and using a sediment pole to measure the amount of sediment at each location. Force the stick to the bottom of the system an d then remove it and measure the amount of sediment at that location. Again, do n ot go into the system under any circumstances without proper ventilation equipment and training. 5. When to Clean the System Any blockages should be safely removed as soon as practical so that the Stormwater detention system will fill and drain properly before the next stormwater event. The Dry Detention System should be completely cleaned whenever the sediment occupies more than 10% to 15% of the originally designed system’s volume. The Wet Detention System should be cleaned when the sediment occupies more than 30% or 1/3rd of the originally designed system’s volume. NOTE: Check with your municipality in regards to cleaning criteria, as the allowable sediment before cleaning may be more or less then described above. 6. How to Clean the StormTrap The system should be completely cleaned back to 100% of the originally designed storage volume whenever the above sediment levels have been reached. Be sure to wait at least 3 days after a stormwater event to be sure that the system is completely drained (if it is a Dry Detention System), and all of the sediments have settled to the bottom of the s ystem (if it is a Wet Detention System). Do not enter the System unless you are properly trained, equipped, and qualified to enter a confined space as identified by local occupational safety and health regulations. There are many maintenance companies that are in business to help you clean your underground stormwater detention systems and water quality units. Please call your StormTrap representative for referrals in your area. A. Dry Detention System Cleaning Maintenance is typically performed using a vacuum truck. Sediment should be flushed towards a vacuum hose for thorough removal. For a Dry Detention System, remove the manhole cover at the top of the system and lower a vacuum hose into one of the rows of the StormTrap system. Open up the manhole at the opposite end of the StormTrap and use sewer jetting equipment to force water in the same row from one end of the StormTrap row to the opposite side. The rows of the StormTrap are completely open in one contiguous channel from one end to the other for easy cleaning. Place the vacuum hose and the sewer jetting equipment in the next row and repeat the process until all of the rows have been cleaned. When finished, replace all covers that were removed and dispose of the collected material properly. B. Wet Detention System Cleaning If the system was designed to maintain a permanent pool of water, floatables and any oil should be removed in a separate procedure prior to the removal of all sediment. The floatable trash is removed first by using a bucket strainer to capture and remove any floating debris. The floatable oils are then removed off the top of the water by using the vacuum truck to suck off any floatable fluids and liquids. The next step is to use the vacuum truck to gently remove the clarified water above the sediment layer. The final step is to clean the sediment for each row as described above in the paragraph “A. Dry Detention System Cleaning”. For smaller systems, the vacuum truck can remove all of the sediment in the basin without using the sewer jetting equipment because of the smaller space. 7. Inspection Reports Proof of these inspections is the responsibility of the property owner. All inspection reports and data should be kept on site or at a location where they will be accessible for years in the future. Some municipalities require these inspection and cleaning reports to be forwarded to the proper governmental permitting agency on an annual basis. Refer to your local and national regulations for any addition al maintenance requirements and schedules not contained herein. Inspections should be a part of your standard operati ng procedure. Figure 1. During inspection, measure the distance from finished grade to the top of the sediment inside the system. Sample inspection and maintenance log PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY For: Nirvana Business Park DR21-0024 821 Main Street Chula Vista, CA 91911 APN: 644-050-13, 644-050-14, and 644-050-80 Prepared By: 3-14-2022 Gregory W. Lang, P.E. RCE 68075 EXP: 06-30-23 Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, Inc. 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff, CA 92007 Prepared for: VWP-OP Nirvana Owner, LLC 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 305 Phoenix, AZ 85016 May 5, 2022 PLSA Job No. 3668 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 City of Chula Vista is confined to a review only and does not relieve me, as engineer of work, of my responsibilities for project design. 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 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 6 1.3 Proposed Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 7 2. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................. 9 2.1 Rational Method ........................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Runoff Coefficient ........................................................................................................................ 11 2.3 Rainfall Intensity .......................................................................................................................... 13 2.4 Tributary Areas ............................................................................................................................. 13 2.5 Hydraulics .................................................................................................................................... 13 2.6 Energy Dissipation ....................................................................................................................... 13 2.7 Curb Inlet and Catch Basin Sizing ............................................................................................... 14 2.8 Detention Basin Routing .............................................................................................................. 14 3. CALCULATIONS/RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 16 3.1 Pre- & Post-Development Peak Flow Comparison ...................................................................... 16 3.2 Storm Water Quality..................................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Hydromodification ....................................................................................................................... 17 4. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 17 Appendix 1 ........................................................ Existing Condition Hydrology Node Maps Appendix 2 ....................................................... Proposed Condition Hydrology Node Maps Appendix 3 .............................................................................. Hydrology Design Summary Appendix 4 .................................................................... AES Rational Method Calculations Appendix 5 ....................................................................... Modified-Puls Detention Routing Appendix 6 ................................................................................................. WSPGW Output Appendix 7 ............................................................................................... HEC-RAS Output 4 5 1. INTRODUCTION This Preliminary Drainage Study for the proposed Nirvana Business Park 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 50-year and 100-year, 6-hour storm event. 1.1 Project Description The Nirvana Business Park is an industrial complex consisting of three two-story buildings and one three-story storage facility totaling 296,753 square feet on 13.31 acres, located at 821 Main Street in the City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California. The property is defined as Parcel 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 21587 and a portion of Lot 2, Sec 20, T18S, R1E San Bernadino Meridian of ROS 16999. The project site is identified as Tax Assessor parcel numbers – APN 644-050-13, 14 and a portion of 644-050- 80. The project includes Design Review to construct four buildings as follows: • Building 1 – a 59,044 square-foot warehouse with office and mezzanine • Building 2 – a 44,592 square-foot warehouse with office and mezzanine • Building 3 – a 140,802 square-foot, 3-story self-storage building • Building 4 – a 50,030 warehouse with office and mezzanine The site is General Plan designated IL – Limited Industrial and Zoned (ILP) Limited Industrial. The proposed light industrial uses include primarily warehouse and manufacturing, assembly, storage, and warehouse distribution. The self-storage facility will feature interior and exterior accessible storage spaces, with surface loading and elevators for upper floors. Hours of operation for the business park are planned to be Monday through Friday 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Saturday 6:00 a.m. to noon. The self-storage facilities will have 24/7 access. The existing site is currently undeveloped except for existing, public drainage infrastructure located along the southern property boundary on the north side of Main Street. The site is bounded to the north by automobile salvage yards, to the west by industrial buildings, to the south by Main Street, and to the east by the Otay Ranch Village 3 development. The site condition is divided into four (4) drainage basins, Basin A through Basin D, and four (4) 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 Nirvana Business Park by PLSA, dated March 14, 2022. The project’s Points of Compliance (POCs) for hydromodification management have been detailed on the Node Maps found in Appendix 1 and 2. Per Section 3 – General Design Criteria of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual (March 2012), the Modified Rational Method should be used to determine peak flow rates 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. In addition, all drainage facilities within street right of ways shall be designed for a 50-year frequency storm. 6 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. Existing hydrologic data was found from the City of Chula Vista Drainage Master Plan, dated February 2005. The project site is located in the Otay River Drainage Basin. 1.2 Existing Conditions The 13.31-acre project site consists of undeveloped land located northeast of the intersection of Main Street and Nirvana Avenue along the north side of Main Street. Topographically, the site slopes from the north to the southerly property boundary, comprised of four (4) existing drainage basins with four (4) discharge locations. There are two (2) major offsite drainage conveyances through the project site. Existing Drainage Basin A comprises the western portion of the site and includes offsite runoff from an offsite area northwest of the project site. Offsite runoff is conveyed through a 60” corrugated steel pipe (CSP) storm drain and splits into two (2) 54” CSP storm drains before discharging through a headwall at the northwest corner of the site. The existing 50-year offsite flow is 181.47 cubic feet per second per the City of Chula Vista Drainage Master Plan (see Appendix 3 for references). Flow then travels south through an open channel to an existing public 6' x 2.5' double RCB culvert system underneath Main Street. The culvert system discharges to the south of Main Street and into the Otay River Valley. Existing Drainage Basin B is located in the center of the site and includes offsite runoff from the north. Offsite runoff is conveyed through a 72” CSP storm drain and discharges through a headwall at the northern property boundary. The existing 50-year peak source flow is 312.81 cubic feet per second per the City of Chula Vista Drainage Master Plan (see Appendix 3 for references). Flow then travels south through an open channel to three (3) existing public 48" RCP storm drains underneath Main Street. The culvert system discharges to the south of Main Street and into the Otay River Valley. Existing Drainage Basin C comprises the eastern portion of the site. Runoff surface flows down the existing hillside and across the southern property boundary into Main Street. Runoff is then directed via curb and gutter to an existing Type B curb inlet along Main Street. The curb inlet discharges south through an existing 24” RCP storm drain and into the Otay River Valley. Existing Drainage Basin D comprises the southern portion of the site. Runoff sheet flows down the existing hillside and across the southern property boundary into Main Street. Runoff is then directed via curb and gutter to an existing Type B curb inlet along Main Street. The curb inlet discharges south through an existing 18” RCP storm drain and into the Otay River Valley. For additional information regarding the existing storm drain infrastructure conveying offsite drainage, refer to As-Built Drawing No. 75-97, 75-98D and 75-101D on file with the City of Chula Vista. Existing 50-year peak flow rates at the storm drain outfalls were found from the City of Chula Vista Drainage Master Plan (see Appendix 3 for references). The Otay River flows to the 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. 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. 7 Table 1.1 summarizes the existing condition 100-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations. Table 1.2 summarizes the existing condition 50-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations including offsite flow from the public storm drain channels. For delineated basin details, please refer to the Existing Condition Hydrology Node Map included in Appendix 1 of this report. TABLE 1.1 – Summary of Existing Condition 100-Year Peak Flows Existing Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Tc (min) 100-Year Intensity, I (in/hr) Existing Q100 (cfs) Basin A 4.41 0.57 5.19 6.24 15.44 Basin B 2.96 0.58 4.35 6.32 10.90 Basin C 4.77 0.57 4.87 6.32 17.22 Basin D 1.26 0.60 5.00 6.32 4.77 Total 13.39 0.58 48.33 TABLE 1.2 – Summary of Existing Condition 50-Year Peak Flows Existing Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Tc (min) 50-Year Intensity, I (in/hr) Existing Q50 (cfs) Offsite Flow Q50 (cfs) Summed Data Flow Q50 (cfs) Basin A 4.41 0.57 4.46 5.53 13.70 181.47 195.17 Basin B 2.96 0.58 3.34 5.53 9.54 312.81 322.35 Basin C 4.77 0.57 4.87 5.53 15.07 0 15.07 Basin D 1.26 0.60 5.00 5.53 4.18 0 4.18 Total 13.39 0.58 42.49 494.28 536.77 Note: Offsite flows are the cumulative source flows from the existing offsite drainage conveyances. See the Existing Condition Hydrology Node Map (Appendix 1) for location of existing offsite drainage conveyances. Summed Data flow is the Existing 50-year peak flow plus the Offsite Flow. 1.3 Proposed Conditions The project will include the construction of four industrial buildings, paved roadways and parking areas, retaining walls, and other associated improvements. The project will be accessed by a proposed driveway off Nirvana Avenue. Drainage improvements will consist of curb inlets, catch basins, ribbon gutters, brow ditches, and storm drain pipes. The project will also have two underground detention systems and for peak flow attenuation as well as two proprietary Modular Wetland Systems for storm water quality treatment. The proposed site will consist of four (4) major drainage basins with four (4) discharge locations to mimic the existing conditions. The site grading and onsite storm drain system have been designed to avoid diversion of drainage. The two existing on-site, open channel drainage conveyances which transport off-site storm water from upstream public storm drain infrastructure will be replaced with a new 60” RCP pipe and a 72” RCP pipe. The existing open channels will be replaced by pipe storm drain infrastructure to allow the grading and development of the property since the existing channels bisect the property from its access point out to 8 Nirvana Avenue. The proposed alignment of these two new drainage systems will be slightly adjusted from the existing open channel flow paths through the property but maintain the same connection points to the existing public storm drain infrastructure north of the project site and south of the project site as in the existing condition. The new on-site storm drain infrastructure will convey the off-site run-on to the existing discharge points along the southerly property line to the existing public storm drain infrastructure underneath Main Street. The existing public storm drain easements per PM 21587 will be vacated and new public storm drain easements will be prepared to align with the proposed public, on-site storm drain infrastructure. A 60"-dia RCP storm drain will convey offsite runoff from the northwest and discharge to the existing 6' x 2.5' double RCB culvert system underneath Main Street. The existing culvert system discharges to the south of Main Street and into the Otay River. A 72"-dia RCP storm drain will convey offsite runoff from the north and discharge to the three (3) existing 48"-dia RCP storm drains underneath Main Street. The three (3) existing 48"-dia RCP storm drains discharge to the south of Main Street and into the Otay River. Storm water runoff from the western portion of the proposed development (Drainage Basin A) is routed to the northwest corner of the site for storm water treatment and detention and discharged into the proposed 60" RCP offsite runoff storm drain system. Runoff from the cut slope at the northwest corner of the site will discharge directly to the 60" RCP storm drain system. The proposed 60” RCP storm drain will connect to the existing 6' x 2.5' double RCB culvert system underneath Main Street. Storm water from the eastern portion of the proposed development (Drainage Basin B) is routed to the northeast corner of the site for storm water treatment and detention and discharged into the proposed 72" RCP offsite runoff storm drain system. Slope runoff along the northern property boundary will discharge directly into the proposed 72” RCP storm drain system. The proposed 72” RCP storm drain will connect to the existing triple 48" RCP storm drain system underneath Main Street. Slope runoff along the southern property boundary will sheet flow into a new brow ditch located along the right-of-way line along Main Street. There is a high point on Main Street which forms two drainage basins. Runoff from Drainage Basin C will discharge into the existing Type B curb inlet and existing 18” RCP storm drain under Main Street. Runoff from Drainage Basin D will discharge into the existing Type B curb inlet and existing 24” RCP storm drain under Main Street. All developed site runoff discharges through existing storm drain infrastructure and into the Otay River. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. Prior to discharging from the project site, the project’s runoff is directed to a series of BMPs including trash screen devices, Contech pretreatment units, StormTrap underground detention vaults, and BioClean Modular Wetland Systems. The underground detention vaults have been designed to meet 50-year and 100-year peak flow detention requirements. The Modular Wetland Systems (MWS) have been designed for storm water treatment. Treatment of storm water runoff from the site has been addressed in a separate report- “Priority Development Project (PDP) Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) for Nirvana Business Park” by Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates. The project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. The underground detention vaults have been designed to provide flow control in the form of peak flow attenuation. The vaults have been designed to include low-flow and mid-flow orifice outlets and an overflow weir to control peak flows for the design storms analyzed. The required water quality treatment flow is diverted to the downstream Modular Wetland System in accordance with City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. Overflow relief for the 100-year storm event is provided with a partition weir 9 installed within the vaults and discharged directly to the proposed 60”-dia and 72”-dia storm drain pipes conveying offsite runoff through the project site. Table 1.3 below summarizes the proposed and detained condition 100-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations. Table 1.4 below summarizes the proposed and detained condition 50-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations, including offsite flow from the public storm drain channels. For delineated basin details, please refer to the Proposed Condition Hydrology Node Map included as an Attachment of this report. TABLE 1.3 – Summary of Proposed Condition 100-Year Peak Flows Proposed Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Tc (min) 100-Year Intensity, I (in/hr) Proposed Q100 (cfs) Detained Q100 (cfs) Basin A 7.50 0.81 9.31 4.47 27.06 14.44 Basin B 5.72 0.82 6.00 5.93 27.54 10.64 Basin C 0.48 0.60 5.00 6.32 1.82 1.82 Basin D 0.31 0.60 5.00 6.32 1.16 1.16 Total 14.00 0.80 57.58 28.06 Note: Proposed 100-year flows are post-project peak flows that have not been reduced from detention routing. TABLE 1.4 – Summary of Proposed Condition 50-Year Peak Flows Proposed Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Tc (min) 50-Year Intensity, I (in/hr) Proposed Q50 (cfs) Detained Q50 (cfs) Offsite Flow Q50 (cfs) Summed Data Flow Q50 (cfs) Basin A 7.50 0.81 9.20 4.47 23.34 9.33 181.47 190.80 Basin B 5.72 0.82 6.11 5.15 23.91 7.14 312.81 319.95 Basin C 0.48 0.60 5.00 5.53 1.59 1.59 0 1.59 Basin D 0.31 0.60 5.00 5.53 1.01 1.01 0 1.01 Total 14.00 0.80 49.86 19.08 494.28 513.36 Note: Proposed 50-year flows are post-project peak flows that have not been reduced from detention routing. Offsite flows are the cumulative source flows from the existing offsite drainage conveyances. See Proposed Condition Hydrology Node Map (Appendix 2) for location of existing offsite drainage conveyances. Summed Data flow is the Detained 50-year peak flow plus the Offsite Flow. 10 2. METHODOLOGY Runoff calculations for Nirvana Business Park, 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) was used to calculate the peak runoff from the 50-year and 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 50-year and 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 2016 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) For drainage areas where the runoff is not conveyed in a defined channel, or the drainage pattern is sheet flow, the 50-year and 100-year flow rates are calculated using Q = CIA. The time of concentration is assumed to be 5 minutes when calculating the rainfall intensity. Refer to Table 1.1 for the 50-year and 100-year peak flow calculation for Existing Drainage Basin D, and Table 1.2 for the 50-year and 100-year peak flow calculation for Proposed Drainage Basin C and Proposed Drainage Basin D. 11 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 Existing and Proposed 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 existing condition weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. In the proposed 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 below for proposed condition weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. TABLE 2.1- Summary of Existing Condition Weighted Runoff Coefficient Calculations Existing Condition - Weighted Runoff Coefficient Up Node Down Node Area (ac) C1 A1 C2 A2 C 10 11 0.13 0.45 0.13 0.60 0.00 0.45 11 12 3.48 0.45 3.48 0.60 0.00 0.45 20 13 0.13 0.45 0.00 0.60 0.13 0.60 21 21 0.13 0.45 0.13 0.60 0.00 0.45 30 22 2.10 0.45 2.10 0.60 0.00 0.45 Basin D 2.24 0.45 0.00 0.60 2.24 0.60 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 12 TABLE 2.2- Summary of Proposed Condition Weighted Runoff Coefficient Calculations Proposed Condition - Weighted Runoff Coefficient Up Node Down Node Area (ac) C1 A1 C2 A2 C 100 101 0.12 0.85 0.12 0.60 0.00 0.85 101 102 0.62 0.85 0.62 0.60 0.00 0.85 103 102 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 105 104 0.64 0.85 0.64 0.60 0.00 0.85 107 106 0.63 0.85 0.63 0.60 0.00 0.85 109 108 1.62 0.85 1.62 0.60 0.00 0.85 111 110 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 113 112 1.23 0.85 1.16 0.60 0.07 0.83 115 114 1.14 0.85 1.14 0.60 0.00 0.85 118 117 0.58 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.58 0.60 122 122 0.42 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.42 0.60 200 201 0.05 0.85 0.05 0.60 0.00 0.85 201 202 0.65 0.85 0.65 0.60 0.00 0.85 203 202 0.60 0.85 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.85 205 204 0.28 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.28 0.60 207 206 0.31 0.85 0.31 0.60 0.00 0.85 208 208 0.34 0.85 0.34 0.60 0.00 0.85 209 210 0.31 0.85 0.31 0.60 0.00 0.85 211 211 0.45 0.85 0.45 0.60 0.00 0.85 213 212 0.68 0.85 0.68 0.60 0.00 0.85 215 214 1.53 0.85 1.53 0.60 0.00 0.85 218 218 0.32 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.32 0.60 219 219 0.08 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.08 0.60 220 220 0.09 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.09 0.60 Basin C 0.48 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.48 0.60 Basin D 0.31 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.31 0.60 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 13 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 50- year and 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. See Appendix 3 of this report for Isopluvial maps for the 50-year and 100-year rainfall event. 2.4 Tributary Areas Drainage basins for the existing and proposed project site are delineated in the Existing and Proposed 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. The County of Los Angeles Water Surface Pressure Gradient (WSPGW) program was used to perform the hydraulic grade line analysis of the proposed 60” and 72” storm drain conveyance systems in conformance with the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual (March 2012). The WSPGW program computes and plots uniform and non-uniform steady flow water surface profiles and pressure gradients in open channels or closed conduits with irregular or regular sections. The flow in a system may alternate between supercritical, sub-critical, or pressure flow in any sequence. The program uses mathematical and hydraulic principles to calculate data such as cross-sectional area, wetted perimeter, normal depth, critical depth, velocity, pressure, and momentum. Hydraulic analysis has been performed based on the proposed 50-year condition as described in Section 1.3. Refer to Appendix 6 for detailed WSPGW output. The 50-year storm was analyzed for the storm drains that convey the off-site run-on and the existing public storm drain infrastructure per the City of Chula Vista’s Subdivision Manual Section 3 General Design Criteria in Section 3-201.3. The results of the WSPGW analysis shows high velocities in the proposed 60” RCP and 72” RCP storm drain pipes. To mitigate potential RCP pipe abrasion from high peak velocities, thicker wall RCP pipe with high-strength concrete will be used. The new RCP pipes will also be installed with a slurry backfill in the pipe bedding zone. For pipe velocities that exceed 20 feet per second, the concrete thickness on the inside of the RCP pipe will be increased by a minimum of 1.5 inches to provide additional concrete cover over the pipe’s reinforcing steel and over the reinforcing steel for the proposed box culvert. The concrete design strength for reinforced concrete pipe and box culverts in these reaches shall be 5,000 psi for 14 velocities exceeding 20 feet per second and 6,000 psi for velocities exceeding 30 feet per second. In addition, water tight joints will be utilized in accordance with ASTM C76/C443/C361 & C655, Greenbook S 207-2 and Caltrans S 65 requirements. 2.6 Energy Dissipation The proposed flow velocity at the downstream end of the existing public storm drain facilities was calculated using WSPGW. The size of existing rip rap energy dissipation at the existing storm drain systems’ outfalls are per As-Built Drawing No. 92-160 for the existing double 48” RCP storm drain outfall under Main Street (50-Year Existing Condition Hydrology Node 14) and Drawing No. 94-103 for the existing triple 48” RCP storm drain outfall under Main Street (50-Year Existing Condition Hydrology Node 23). The proposed peak 50-year velocities were compared to the design velocity rating of the existing rip rap rock class and thickness per the table found in San Diego Regional Standard Drawing (SDRSD) D-40. Since the existing rip rap energy dissipaters are not sufficiently sized for energy dissipation the proposed 50-year peak flow rates and velocities, the existing rip rap pads will be re- constructed. The existing rip rap pads will be grouted and additional rip rap will be placed down gradient of the grouted rip rap at lengths shown on the Proposed Condition Hydrology Node Map – 50-Year Storm Frequency. See 50-Year Proposed Condition Hydrology Nodes 124 and 221 for proposed rip rap locations. The sizes of the new rip rap pads have been calculated using HEC-RAS software. Please refer to Appendix 7 for HEC-RAS output. The 50-year storm was analyzed for the storm drains that convey the off-site run-on and the existing public storm drain infrastructure per the City of Chula Vista’s Subdivision Manual Section 3 General Design Criteria in Section 3-201.3. 2.7 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. 15 2.8 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 50-year and 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 below. TABLE 2.3- Summary of 100-Year 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-A1 6.49 0.85 10 25.13 16 12.79 6.99 BMP-B1 5.22 0.85 6 27.00 12 9.98 5.14 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 (3) P6-100yr = 2.4 inches TABLE 2.4- Summary of 50-Year Detention Basin Routing Detention Basin Tributary Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Inflow Tc (min)1 50-Year Peak Inflow (cfs) Outflow Tc (min) 50-Year Peak Outflow (cfs) Peak Elevation (ft)2 BMP-A1 6.49 0.85 10 21.67 17 7.91 6.55 BMP-B1 5.22 0.85 6 23.47 11 6.44 4.38 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 (3) P6-50yr = 2.1 inches 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, 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 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. 16 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 existing condition peak flow rates for the 50-year and 100-year storm event at the project’s discharge locations. TABLE 3.1- Existing Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Existing Q100 (cfs) Existing Q50 (cfs) Basin A 4.41 0.57 15.44 13.70 Basin B 2.96 0.58 10.90 9.54 Basin C 4.77 0.57 17.22 15.07 Basin D 1.26 0.60 4.77 4.18 Total 13.39 0.58 48.33 42.49 Table 3.2 itemizes the proposed unmitigated and mitigated condition peak flow rates for the 50-year and 100-year storm event at the project’s discharge locations. TABLE 3.2- Proposed and Detained Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Detained Q100 (cfs) Detained Q50 (cfs) Basin A 7.50 0.81 14.44 9.33 Basin B 5.72 0.82 10.64 7.14 Basin C 0.48 0.60 1.82 1.82 Basin D 0.31 0.60 1.16 1.16 Total 14.00 0.80 28.06 19.45 17 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 50-year and 100-year rainfall event. TABLE 3.3- Existing Vs. Detained Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Existing Q100 (cfs) Detained Q100 (cfs) Existing Vs. Detained Q100 (cfs) Existing Q50 (cfs) Detained Q50 (cfs) Existing Vs. Detained Q50 (cfs) Basin A 15.44 14.44 -1.00 13.70 9.33 -4.37 Basin B 10.90 10.64 -0.26 9.54 7.14 -2.40 Basin C 17.22 1.82 -15.40 15.07 1.82 -13.25 Basin D 4.77 1.16 -3.61 4.18 1.16 -3.02 Total 48.33 28.06 -20.28 42.49 19.45 -23.04 3.2 Storm Water Quality The proposed site will have a Modular Wetland System 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 Nirvana Business Park by PLSA, dated March 14, 2022, under separate cover. 3.3 Hydromodification The project is exempt from hydromodification management plan (HMP) requirements. For additional information regarding HMP exemption, refer to the Storm Water Quality Management Plan for Nirvana Business Park by PLSA, dated March 14, 2022, under separate cover. 4. CONCLUSION This report analyzed the 50-year and 100-year storm event hydrology for the proposed site using the Advanced Engineering Software (AES) and demonstrated that the post-developed peak flow rates are less than the pre-developed peak flow rates at the project’s discharge locations. In addition, the proposed storm drain systems are sized to convey the proposed flow rates and calculations can be found in the appendices of this report. As shown in Tables 3.1 through 3.3, the proposed project will not contribute storm water runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems. As discussed in Section 2.5, the proposed RCP pipe and concrete box culverts will be slurry backfilled to help mitigate the anticipated peak flow velocities through these systems. In addition, concrete cover over the reinforcing steel inside of the storm drain conduits will be increased by 1-1/2 inches, higher strength concrete will be utilized, and water tight gasket joints will be constructed as additional measures to help mitigate the anticipated high velocities in the new proposed storm drain systems. While the 50-year peak flow velocity in the two existing public storm drain systems in Main Street are higher than in the existing condition, the proposed redesigned rip rap energy dissipaters will effectively attenuate the flows as per the County of San Diego’s Hydraulic Design Manual. As showing in the hydraulic analysis presented in Appendix 7, the proposed rip rap energy dissipaters at the existing public storm drain outfalls into the Otay River have been adequately sized to handle the increased peak 50-year velocities from the proposed project. Appendix 1 Existing Condition Hydrology Node Maps Appendix 2 Proposed Condition Hydrology Node Maps Appendix 3 Hydrology Design Summary 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: 3668E50.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:14 03/23/2022 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 50.00 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; 5.533 2) 10.000; 3.538 3) 15.000; 2.724 4) 20.000; 2.263 5) 25.000; 1.959 6) 30.000; 1.742 7) 40.000; 1.447 8) 50.000; 1.253 9) 60.000; 1.114 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 = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 77.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 190.00 EXISTING CONDITION - 50 YEAR DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 159.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 31.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.666 WARNING: THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE, 10.%, IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.18 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.60 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11.00 TO NODE 11.00 IS CODE = 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW = 181.47(CFS) USER-SPECIFIED AREA ASSOCIATED TO SOURCE FLOW = 115.00(ACRES) * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 AREA(AC.) = 115.00 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 182.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 115.18 **************************************************************************** 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) = 159.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 130.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 483.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0600 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 2.00 "Z" FACTOR = 2.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.035 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 10.00 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5600 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 188.62 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.09 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 2.34 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.67 Tc(MIN.) = 4.33 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 4.23 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 13.11 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.562 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 13.70 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 2.37 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.22 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 12.00 = 560.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 12.00 TO NODE 13.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 129.01 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 126.97 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 99.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 52.0 INCH PIPE IS 33.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 18.55 GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 52.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 195.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.09 Tc(MIN.) = 4.42 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 13.00 = 659.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 13.00 TO NODE 14.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 119.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 118.80 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.89 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 48.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 195.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 4.48 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 14.00 = 692.00 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 = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 52.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 175.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 154.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 21.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.013 WARNING: THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE, 10.%, IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.27 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.27 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 21.00 IS CODE = 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW = 312.81(CFS) USER-SPECIFIED AREA ASSOCIATED TO SOURCE FLOW = 227.30(ACRES) * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(AC.) = 227.30 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 313.08 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 227.38 **************************************************************************** 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) = 175.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 130.60 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 346.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1283 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 2.00 "Z" FACTOR = 2.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.035 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 10.00 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5800 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 317.71 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 18.35 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 2.48 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.31 Tc(MIN.) = 3.33 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.89 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.27 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.581 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.0 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 9.54 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 2.51 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 18.35 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 22.00 = 398.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 22.00 TO NODE 23.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 130.31 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 128.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 137.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 16.31 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 48.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 3 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 322.35 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 3.47 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 23.00 = 535.00 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 = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 86.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 221.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 214.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 7.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 4.149 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.43 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.13 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.43 **************************************************************************** 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) = 214.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 139.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 240.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.3125 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 10.00 "Z" FACTOR = 5.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 2.00 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 7.75 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.40 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.13 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.74 Tc(MIN.) = 4.89 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 4.64 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.63 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.571 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 15.07 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.20 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.73 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 32.00 = 326.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.8 TC(MIN.) = 4.89 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 15.07 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ 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 1982-2008 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: 3668P50.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:21 03/23/2022 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 50.00 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; 5.533 2) 10.000; 3.538 3) 15.000; 2.724 4) 20.000; 2.263 5) 25.000; 1.959 6) 30.000; 1.742 7) 40.000; 1.447 8) 50.000; 1.253 9) 60.000; 1.114 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) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 184.00 PROPOSED CONDITION - 50 YEAR DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 183.80 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.20 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 4.009 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 50.00 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 62 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>(STREET TABLE SECTION # 1 USED)<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 183.80 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 180.16 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 339.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 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) = 1.86 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.32 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 8.66 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.15 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.68 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.63 Tc(MIN.) = 6.64 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.880 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.62 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.57 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.07 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.36 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.05 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.39 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 439.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.880 *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) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.66 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.73 TC(MIN.) = 6.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 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) = 176.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 174.81 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 226.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.90 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.73 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.77 Tc(MIN.) = 7.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 665.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.574 *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) = 0.64 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.99 TC(MIN.) = 7.40 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 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) = 174.81 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 173.70 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 185.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.62 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.55 Tc(MIN.) = 7.95 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 106.00 = 850.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.355 *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) = 0.63 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.33 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.03 TC(MIN.) = 7.95 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 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) = 173.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 173.52 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 28.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.13 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.03 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.08 Tc(MIN.) = 8.03 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 878.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.324 *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) = 1.62 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.95 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 13.93 TC(MIN.) = 8.03 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 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) = 173.19 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 173.08 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 23.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.33 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 13.93 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 8.09 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 = 901.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.300 *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) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.58 TC(MIN.) = 8.09 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 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) = 173.08 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 172.00 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 181.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.98 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 14.58 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.43 Tc(MIN.) = 8.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 112.00 = 1082.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.128 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8399 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.51 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 18.51 TC(MIN.) = 8.52 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 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) = 171.67 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 170.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 176.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 17.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.62 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 18.51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.39 Tc(MIN.) = 8.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 114.00 = 1258.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.974 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8417 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.85 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 21.67 TC(MIN.) = 8.91 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 117.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 170.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 169.32 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 14.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 20.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 21.67 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 8.92 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 117.00 = 1272.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 118.00 TO NODE 117.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.970 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8218 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.58 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.38 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 7.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 23.03 TC(MIN.) = 8.92 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 168.99 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 162.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 26.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 31.65 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 23.03 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 8.93 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 119.00 = 1298.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW = 181.47(CFS) USER-SPECIFIED AREA ASSOCIATED TO SOURCE FLOW = 115.00(ACRES) * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 AREA(AC.) = 115.00 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 204.50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 122.06 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 119.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 159.30 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 128.21 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 258.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 60.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 36.54 GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 60.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 204.50 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 9.05 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 121.00 = 1556.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 127.88 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 127.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 88.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.47 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 52.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 204.50 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.15 Tc(MIN.) = 9.20 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 122.00 = 1644.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.855 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8094 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.42 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.97 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 7.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 23.34 TC(MIN.) = 9.20 * SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 AREA(ACRES) = 115.0 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 204.81 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 122.5 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 127.42 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 126.97 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 95.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.22 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 52.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 204.81 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 9.38 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 123.00 = 1739.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 119.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 118.80 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 40.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.98 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 48.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 204.81 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.07 Tc(MIN.) = 9.45 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 124.00 = 1779.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** 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) = 76.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 187.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 186.10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.40 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.200 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.24 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.05 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.24 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 201.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 62 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>(STREET TABLE SECTION # 1 USED)<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 186.10 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 184.53 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 140.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 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) = 1.76 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.31 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 8.34 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.16 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.67 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.08 Tc(MIN.) = 4.28 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.65 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.06 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.29 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.36 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.29 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.47 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.90 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 202.00 = 216.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 203.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 0.60 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.82 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.11 TC(MIN.) = 4.28 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 202.00 TO NODE 204.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 180.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 274.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.16 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.11 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.74 Tc(MIN.) = 5.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 204.00 = 490.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 205.00 TO NODE 204.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.525 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8057 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.28 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.93 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.03 TC(MIN.) = 5.02 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 204.00 TO NODE 206.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 178.30 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 177.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 87.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.33 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.03 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.20 Tc(MIN.) = 5.22 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 206.00 = 577.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 207.00 TO NODE 206.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.446 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8130 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.44 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.37 TC(MIN.) = 5.22 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 206.00 TO NODE 208.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 177.26 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 176.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 61.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.05 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.37 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 5.34 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 208.00 = 638.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 208.00 TO NODE 208.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.396 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8186 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.85 TC(MIN.) = 5.34 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 208.00 TO NODE 208.00 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< ============================================================================ **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 210.00 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) = 186.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 184.62 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.88 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.326 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 83.20 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.46 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.46 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 210.00 TO NODE 211.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 180.62 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 179.33 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 154.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.46 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.58 Tc(MIN.) = 3.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 211.00 = 254.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 211.00 TO NODE 211.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 0.45 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.12 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.57 TC(MIN.) = 3.91 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 211.00 TO NODE 212.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 179.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.43 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.57 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.08 Tc(MIN.) = 3.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 212.00 = 284.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 213.00 TO NODE 212.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 0.68 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.77 TC(MIN.) = 3.98 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 212.00 TO NODE 214.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 178.63 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 177.11 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 123.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.52 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.77 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 4.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 214.00 = 407.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 215.00 TO NODE 214.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 1.53 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 13.97 TC(MIN.) = 4.26 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 214.00 TO NODE 216.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 176.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 176.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 5.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 10.80 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 13.97 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 4.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 216.00 = 412.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 208.00 TO NODE 216.00 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 13.97 4.27 5.533 2.97 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 216.00 = 412.00 FEET. ** MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 9.85 5.34 5.396 2.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 216.00 = 638.00 FEET. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 21.83 4.27 5.533 2 23.47 5.34 5.396 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 23.47 Tc(MIN.) = 5.34 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.2 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 217.00 TO NODE 218.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 175.75 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 146.69 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 538.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 17.81 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 23.47 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.50 Tc(MIN.) = 5.85 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 218.00 = 1176.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 218.00 TO NODE 218.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.195 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8228 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.32 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 23.59 TC(MIN.) = 5.85 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 219.00 TO NODE 219.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.195 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8196 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.25 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 23.84 TC(MIN.) = 5.85 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 219.00 TO NODE 218.00 IS CODE = 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW = 312.81(CFS) USER-SPECIFIED AREA ASSOCIATED TO SOURCE FLOW = 227.30(ACRES) * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(AC.) = 227.30 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 336.65 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 232.90 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 218.00 TO NODE 220.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 141.86 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 130.64 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 216.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 72.0 INCH PIPE IS 29.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 30.51 GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 72.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 336.65 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 5.97 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 220.00 = 1392.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 220.00 TO NODE 220.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.148 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8162 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 23.91 TC(MIN.) = 5.97 * SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(ACRES) = 227.3 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 336.72 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 233.0 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 220.00 TO NODE 221.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 130.31 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 128.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 137.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 16.31 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 48.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 3 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 336.72 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 6.11 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 221.00 = 1529.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.7 TC(MIN.) = 6.11 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 23.91 * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(AC.) = 227.3 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 336.72 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 233.0 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ 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 1982-2008 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: 3668P50.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:20 03/23/2022 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 50.00 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; 5.533 2) 10.000; 3.538 3) 15.000; 2.724 4) 20.000; 2.263 5) 25.000; 1.959 6) 30.000; 1.742 7) 40.000; 1.447 8) 50.000; 1.253 9) 60.000; 1.114 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) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 184.00 DETAINED CONDITION - 50 YEAR DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 183.80 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.20 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 4.009 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 50.00 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 62 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>(STREET TABLE SECTION # 1 USED)<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 183.80 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 180.16 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 339.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 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) = 1.86 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.32 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 8.66 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.15 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.68 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.63 Tc(MIN.) = 6.64 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.880 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.62 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.57 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.07 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.36 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.05 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.39 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 439.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.880 *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) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.66 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.73 TC(MIN.) = 6.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 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) = 176.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 174.81 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 226.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.90 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.73 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.77 Tc(MIN.) = 7.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 665.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.574 *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) = 0.64 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.99 TC(MIN.) = 7.40 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 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) = 174.81 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 173.70 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 185.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.62 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.55 Tc(MIN.) = 7.95 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 106.00 = 850.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.355 *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) = 0.63 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.33 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.03 TC(MIN.) = 7.95 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 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) = 173.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 173.52 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 28.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.13 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.03 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.08 Tc(MIN.) = 8.03 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 878.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.324 *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) = 1.62 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.95 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 13.93 TC(MIN.) = 8.03 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 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) = 173.19 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 173.08 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 23.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.33 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 13.93 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 8.09 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 = 901.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.300 *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) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.58 TC(MIN.) = 8.09 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 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) = 173.08 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 172.00 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 181.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.98 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 14.58 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.43 Tc(MIN.) = 8.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 112.00 = 1082.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.128 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8399 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.51 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 18.51 TC(MIN.) = 8.52 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 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) = 171.67 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 170.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 176.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 17.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.62 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 18.51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.39 Tc(MIN.) = 8.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 114.00 = 1258.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.974 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8417 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.85 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 21.67 TC(MIN.) = 8.91 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 7 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY INFORMATION AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED VALUES ARE AS FOLLOWS: TC(MIN) = 17.00 RAIN INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.54 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.49 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.91 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 117.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 170.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 169.32 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 14.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 16.23 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.91 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 17.01 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 117.00 = 1272.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 118.00 TO NODE 117.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.538 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.4898 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.58 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.88 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 7.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.79 TC(MIN.) = 17.01 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 168.99 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 162.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 26.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 24.23 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.79 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 17.03 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 119.00 = 1298.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW = 181.47(CFS) USER-SPECIFIED AREA ASSOCIATED TO SOURCE FLOW = 115.00(ACRES) * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 AREA(AC.) = 115.00 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 190.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 122.07 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 119.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 159.30 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 128.21 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 258.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 60.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 35.81 GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 60.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 190.26 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 17.15 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 121.00 = 1556.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 127.88 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 127.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 88.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.47 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 52.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 190.26 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.15 Tc(MIN.) = 17.31 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 122.00 = 1644.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.511 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.4959 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.42 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.63 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 7.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.33 TC(MIN.) = 17.31 * SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 AREA(ACRES) = 115.0 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 190.80 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 122.5 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 127.42 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 126.97 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 95.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.22 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 52.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 190.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 17.48 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 123.00 = 1739.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 119.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 118.80 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 40.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.98 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 48.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 2 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 190.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.07 Tc(MIN.) = 17.55 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 181.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 124.00 = 1779.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** 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) = 76.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 187.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 186.10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.40 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.200 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.24 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.05 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.24 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 201.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 62 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>(STREET TABLE SECTION # 1 USED)<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 186.10 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 184.53 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 140.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 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) = 1.76 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.31 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 8.34 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.16 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.67 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.08 Tc(MIN.) = 4.28 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.65 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.06 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.29 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.36 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.29 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.47 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.90 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 202.00 = 216.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 203.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 0.60 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.82 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.11 TC(MIN.) = 4.28 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 202.00 TO NODE 204.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 180.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 274.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.16 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.11 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.74 Tc(MIN.) = 5.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 204.00 = 490.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 205.00 TO NODE 204.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.525 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8057 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.28 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.93 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.03 TC(MIN.) = 5.02 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 204.00 TO NODE 206.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 178.30 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 177.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 87.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.33 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.03 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.20 Tc(MIN.) = 5.22 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 206.00 = 577.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 207.00 TO NODE 206.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.446 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8130 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.44 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.37 TC(MIN.) = 5.22 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 206.00 TO NODE 208.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 177.26 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 176.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 61.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.05 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.37 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 5.34 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 208.00 = 638.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 208.00 TO NODE 208.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.396 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8186 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.85 TC(MIN.) = 5.34 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 208.00 TO NODE 208.00 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< ============================================================================ **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 210.00 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) = 186.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 184.62 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.88 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.326 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 83.20 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.46 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.46 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 210.00 TO NODE 211.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 180.62 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 179.33 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 154.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.46 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.58 Tc(MIN.) = 3.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 211.00 = 254.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 211.00 TO NODE 211.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 0.45 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.12 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.57 TC(MIN.) = 3.91 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 211.00 TO NODE 212.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 179.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.43 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.57 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.08 Tc(MIN.) = 3.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 212.00 = 284.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 213.00 TO NODE 212.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 0.68 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.77 TC(MIN.) = 3.98 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 212.00 TO NODE 214.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 178.63 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 177.11 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 123.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.52 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.77 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 4.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 214.00 = 407.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 215.00 TO NODE 214.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.533 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. *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) = 1.53 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 13.97 TC(MIN.) = 4.26 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 214.00 TO NODE 216.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 176.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 176.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 5.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 10.80 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 13.97 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 4.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 216.00 = 412.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 208.00 TO NODE 216.00 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 13.97 4.27 5.533 2.97 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 209.00 TO NODE 216.00 = 412.00 FEET. ** MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 9.85 5.34 5.396 2.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 216.00 = 638.00 FEET. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 21.83 4.27 5.533 2 23.47 5.34 5.396 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 23.47 Tc(MIN.) = 5.34 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.2 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 217.00 TO NODE 217.00 IS CODE = 7 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY INFORMATION AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED VALUES ARE AS FOLLOWS: TC(MIN) = 11.00 RAIN INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.38 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.22 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.44 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 217.00 TO NODE 218.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 175.75 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 146.69 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 538.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 13.04 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.44 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.69 Tc(MIN.) = 11.69 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 218.00 = 1176.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 218.00 TO NODE 218.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.263 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.3791 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.32 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.63 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.85 TC(MIN.) = 11.69 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 219.00 TO NODE 219.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.263 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.3822 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.16 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.01 TC(MIN.) = 11.69 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 219.00 TO NODE 218.00 IS CODE = 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>USER SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW AT NODE<<<<< ============================================================================ USER-SPECIFIED CONSTANT SOURCE FLOW = 312.81(CFS) USER-SPECIFIED AREA ASSOCIATED TO SOURCE FLOW = 227.30(ACRES) * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(AC.) = 227.30 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 319.82 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 232.92 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 218.00 TO NODE 220.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 141.86 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 130.64 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 216.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 72.0 INCH PIPE IS 28.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 30.09 GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 72.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 319.82 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 11.81 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 220.00 = 1392.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 220.00 TO NODE 220.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ============================================================================ 50 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.244 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.3856 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.18 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.14 TC(MIN.) = 11.81 * SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(ACRES) = 227.3 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 319.95 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 233.0 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 220.00 TO NODE 221.00 IS CODE = 41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 130.31 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 128.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 137.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 16.31 (PIPE FLOW VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW AT DEPTH = 0.82 * DIAMETER) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 48.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 3 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 319.95 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 11.95 * TOTAL SOURCE FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 221.00 = 1529.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.7 TC(MIN.) = 11.95 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 7.14 * CUMULATIVE SOURCE FLOW DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 312.81 AREA(AC.) = 227.3 * SUMMED DATA: FLOW(CFS) = 319.95 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 233.0 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Appendix 5 Modified-Puls Detention Routing HEC-HMS Detention Routing Summary Outlet Structure for Discharge of BMP-A1 Discharge vs. Elevation Table Low-flow orifice Slot orifice Emergency Overflow No.:1 No.:1 Invert:6.75 ft Invert:0 ft Invert:3.00 ft L:12 ft Dia:3 in Length:3.25 ft Cw:3.1 Dia:0.25 ft Height 0.25 ft Tank Dimensions A:0.049 sq.ft.A:0.81 sq.ft Area:2,700 sq.ft. Co:0.6 Co:0.6 Height:7.50 ft Total Vol:20,250 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) 170.50 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.000 0.0000 170.75 0.25 0.0155 0.0969 0.000 0.000 0.0969 171.00 0.50 0.0310 0.1563 0.000 0.000 0.1563 171.25 0.75 0.0465 0.1960 0.000 0.000 0.1960 171.50 1.00 0.0620 0.2288 0.000 0.000 0.2288 171.75 1.25 0.0775 0.2576 0.000 0.000 0.2576 172.00 1.50 0.0930 0.2834 0.000 0.000 0.2834 172.25 1.75 0.1085 0.3070 0.000 0.000 0.3070 172.50 2.00 0.1240 0.3290 0.000 0.000 0.3290 172.75 2.25 0.1395 0.3496 0.000 0.000 0.3496 173.00 2.50 0.1550 0.3690 0.000 0.000 0.3690 173.25 2.75 0.1705 0.3875 0.000 0.000 0.3875 173.50 3.00 0.1860 0.4051 0.000 0.000 0.4051 173.75 3.25 0.2014 0.4220 1.694 0.000 2.1160 174.00 3.50 0.2169 0.4382 2.588 0.000 3.0259 174.25 3.75 0.2324 0.4539 3.244 0.000 3.6977 174.50 4.00 0.2479 0.4690 3.788 0.000 4.2569 174.75 4.25 0.2634 0.4837 4.263 0.000 4.7468 175.00 4.50 0.2789 0.4979 4.691 0.000 5.1884 175.25 4.75 0.2944 0.5117 5.082 0.000 5.5938 175.50 5.00 0.3099 0.5252 5.446 0.000 5.9707 175.75 5.25 0.3254 0.5383 5.786 0.000 6.3245 176.00 5.50 0.3409 0.5511 6.108 0.000 6.6590 176.25 5.75 0.3564 0.5637 6.413 0.000 6.9771 176.50 6.00 0.3719 0.5759 6.705 0.000 7.2810 176.75 6.25 0.3874 0.5879 6.985 0.000 7.5725 177.00 6.50 0.4029 0.5997 7.253 0.000 7.8530 177.25 6.75 0.4184 0.6112 7.512 0.000 8.1237 177.50 7.00 0.4339 0.6225 7.763 4.650 13.0355 177.75 7.25 0.4494 0.6337 8.006 13.152 21.7915 178.00 7.50 0.4649 0.6446 8.241 24.162 33.0478 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 Outlet Structure for Discharge of BMP-B1 Discharge vs. Elevation Table Low-flow orifice Slot orifice Emergency Overflow No.:1 No.:1 Invert:5.00 ft Invert:0 ft Invert:2.00 ft L:12 ft Dia:3 in Length:3.25 ft Cw:3.1 Dia:0.25 ft Height 0.25 ft Tank Dimensions A:0.049 sq.ft.A:0.81 sq.ft Area:3,500 sq.ft. Co:0.6 Co:0.6 Height:5.67 ft Total Vol:19,845 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) 175.75 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.000 0.0000 176.00 0.25 0.0201 0.0969 0.000 0.000 0.0969 176.25 0.50 0.0402 0.1563 0.000 0.000 0.1563 176.50 0.75 0.0603 0.1960 0.000 0.000 0.1960 176.75 1.00 0.0803 0.2288 0.000 0.000 0.2288 177.00 1.25 0.1004 0.2576 0.000 0.000 0.2576 177.25 1.50 0.1205 0.2834 0.000 0.000 0.2834 177.50 1.75 0.1406 0.3070 0.000 0.000 0.3070 177.75 2.00 0.1607 0.3290 0.000 0.000 0.3290 178.00 2.25 0.1808 0.3496 1.694 0.000 2.0436 178.25 2.50 0.2009 0.3690 2.588 0.000 2.9567 178.50 2.75 0.2210 0.3875 3.244 0.000 3.6313 178.75 3.00 0.2410 0.4051 3.788 0.000 4.1930 179.00 3.25 0.2611 0.4220 4.263 0.000 4.6852 179.25 3.50 0.2812 0.4382 4.691 0.000 5.1287 179.50 3.75 0.3013 0.4539 5.082 0.000 5.5359 179.75 4.00 0.3214 0.4690 5.446 0.000 5.9145 180.00 4.25 0.3415 0.4837 5.786 0.000 6.2698 180.25 4.50 0.3616 0.4979 6.108 0.000 6.6058 180.50 4.75 0.3817 0.5117 6.413 0.000 6.9252 180.75 5.00 0.4017 0.5252 6.705 0.000 7.2303 181.00 5.25 0.4218 0.5383 6.985 4.650 12.1729 181.25 5.50 0.4419 0.5511 7.253 13.152 20.9567 181.42 5.67 0.4556 0.5597 7.431 20.401 28.3914 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 RATIONAL METHOD HYDROGRAPH PROGRAM COPYRIGHT 1992, 2001 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY RUN DATE 3/7/2022 HYDROGRAPH FILE NAME Text1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 10 MIN. 6 HOUR RAINFALL 2.4 INCHES BASIN AREA 6.49 ACRES RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85 PEAK DISCHARGE 25.13 CFS TIME (MIN) = 0 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 TIME (MIN) = 10 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 20 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 30 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 40 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 50 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 60 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 70 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 80 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 90 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 100 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 110 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 120 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 130 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 140 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 150 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 160 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 170 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 180 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 190 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2 TIME (MIN) = 200 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.2 TIME (MIN) = 210 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.6 TIME (MIN) = 220 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3 TIME (MIN) = 230 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 4.4 TIME (MIN) = 240 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.4 TIME (MIN) = 250 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 25.13 TIME (MIN) = 260 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.5 TIME (MIN) = 270 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.4 TIME (MIN) = 280 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.9 TIME (MIN) = 290 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 300 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 310 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 320 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 330 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 340 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 350 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 360 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 370 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 RATIONAL METHOD HYDROGRAPH PROGRAM COPYRIGHT 1992, 2001 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY RUN DATE 3/7/2022 HYDROGRAPH FILE NAME Text1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 5 MIN. 6 HOUR RAINFALL 2.4 INCHES BASIN AREA 5.22 ACRES RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85 PEAK DISCHARGE 27 CFS TIME (MIN) = 0 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 TIME (MIN) = 5 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 10 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 15 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 20 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 25 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 30 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 35 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 40 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 45 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 50 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 55 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 60 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 65 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 70 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 75 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 80 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 85 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 90 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 95 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 100 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 105 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 110 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 115 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 120 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 125 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 130 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 135 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 140 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 145 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 150 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 155 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 160 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 165 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 170 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 175 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 180 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 185 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 190 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 195 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.8 TIME (MIN) = 200 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.9 TIME (MIN) = 205 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.1 TIME (MIN) = 210 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.2 TIME (MIN) = 215 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.5 TIME (MIN) = 220 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.7 TIME (MIN) = 225 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.3 TIME (MIN) = 230 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.8 TIME (MIN) = 235 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 5.6 TIME (MIN) = 240 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 8.9 TIME (MIN) = 245 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 27 TIME (MIN) = 250 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 4.5 TIME (MIN) = 255 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3 TIME (MIN) = 260 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.3 TIME (MIN) = 265 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2 TIME (MIN) = 270 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 275 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 280 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 285 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 290 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 295 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 300 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 305 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 310 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 315 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 320 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 325 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 330 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 335 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 340 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 345 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 350 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 355 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 360 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 365 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 RATIONAL METHOD HYDROGRAPH PROGRAM COPYRIGHT 1992, 2001 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY RUN DATE 3/18/2022 HYDROGRAPH FILE NAME Text1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 10 MIN. 6 HOUR RAINFALL 2.1 INCHES BASIN AREA 6.49 ACRES RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85 PEAK DISCHARGE 21.67 CFS TIME (MIN) = 0 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 TIME (MIN) = 10 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 20 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 30 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 40 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 50 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 60 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 70 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 80 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 90 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 100 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 110 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 120 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 130 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 140 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 150 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 160 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 170 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 180 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 190 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 200 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.9 TIME (MIN) = 210 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.3 TIME (MIN) = 220 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.6 TIME (MIN) = 230 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.9 TIME (MIN) = 240 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.3 TIME (MIN) = 250 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 21.67 TIME (MIN) = 260 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.1 TIME (MIN) = 270 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.1 TIME (MIN) = 280 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 290 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 300 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 310 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 320 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 330 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 340 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 350 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 360 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 370 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 RATIONAL METHOD HYDROGRAPH PROGRAM COPYRIGHT 1992, 2001 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY RUN DATE 3/18/2022 HYDROGRAPH FILE NAME Text1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 6 MIN. 6 HOUR RAINFALL 2.1 INCHES BASIN AREA 5.22 ACRES RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85 PEAK DISCHARGE 23.47 CFS TIME (MIN) = 0 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 TIME (MIN) = 6 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 12 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 18 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 24 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 30 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 36 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 42 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 48 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 54 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 60 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 66 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 72 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 78 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 84 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 90 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 96 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 102 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 108 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 114 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 120 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 126 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 132 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 138 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 144 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 150 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 156 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 162 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 168 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 174 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 180 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 186 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 192 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 198 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 204 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 210 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.9 TIME (MIN) = 216 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.1 TIME (MIN) = 222 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.6 TIME (MIN) = 228 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.9 TIME (MIN) = 234 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 4.3 TIME (MIN) = 240 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 4.4 TIME (MIN) = 246 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 23.47 TIME (MIN) = 252 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.5 TIME (MIN) = 258 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.3 TIME (MIN) = 264 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.8 TIME (MIN) = 270 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 276 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 282 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 288 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 294 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 300 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 306 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.9 TIME (MIN) = 312 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 318 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.8 TIME (MIN) = 324 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 330 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 336 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.7 TIME (MIN) = 342 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 348 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 354 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 360 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0.6 TIME (MIN) = 366 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 Appendix 6 WSPGW Output FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 1 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | .000 118.800 1.442 120.242 190.89 23.40 8.50 128.74 .00 2.96 3.84 4.000 .000 .00 2 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 4.979 .0061 .0585 .29 1.44 2.83 2.84 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 4.979 118.830 1.425 120.255 190.89 23.78 8.78 129.04 .00 2.96 3.83 4.000 .000 .00 2 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 14.306 .0061 .0640 .92 1.42 2.89 2.84 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 19.285 118.917 1.376 120.292 190.89 24.94 9.66 129.95 .00 2.96 3.80 4.000 .000 .00 2 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 13.715 .0061 .0731 1.00 1.38 3.10 2.84 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 33.000 119.000 1.329 120.329 190.89 26.16 10.62 130.95 .00 2.96 3.77 4.000 .000 .00 2 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR 1.0351 .0492 .38 1.33 3.31 .013 .00 .00 PIPE -------------------- WARNING - Junction Analysis - Change in Channel Type --------------- | | | | | | | | | | | | | 40.700 126.970 1.152 128.122 190.89 14.41 3.22 131.35 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 3.978 .0047 .0210 .08 1.15 2.42 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 44.678 126.989 1.138 128.127 190.89 14.59 3.30 131.43 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 15.191 .0047 .0230 .35 1.14 2.46 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 59.869 127.061 1.085 128.146 190.89 15.30 3.63 131.78 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 14.382 .0047 .0265 .38 1.09 2.64 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 74.251 127.129 1.035 128.164 190.89 16.04 4.00 132.16 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 13.628 .0047 .0305 .42 1.03 2.84 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 2 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 87.879 127.193 .986 128.180 190.89 16.83 4.40 132.58 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 12.920 .0047 .0352 .45 .99 3.05 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 100.799 127.255 .941 128.195 190.89 17.65 4.84 133.03 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 12.253 .0047 .0406 .50 .94 3.28 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 113.051 127.313 .897 128.209 190.89 18.51 5.32 133.53 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 11.623 .0047 .0469 .55 .90 3.52 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 124.674 127.368 .855 128.223 190.89 19.41 5.85 134.08 .00 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 11.026 .0047 .0542 .60 .86 3.78 1.92 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 135.700 127.420 .815 128.235 190.89 20.36 6.44 134.67 2.50 2.05 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0050 .0605 .24 2.50 4.06 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 139.700 127.440 .793 128.233 190.26 20.87 6.77 135.00 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 1.515 .0050 .0636 .10 .79 4.22 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 141.215 127.448 .787 128.235 190.26 21.02 6.86 135.10 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 10.106 .0050 .0693 .70 .79 4.27 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 151.321 127.498 .750 128.249 190.26 22.05 7.55 135.80 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 9.580 .0050 .0802 .77 .75 4.58 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 160.901 127.546 .716 128.262 190.26 23.12 8.30 136.56 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 9.081 .0050 .0928 .84 .72 4.92 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 3 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 169.983 127.592 .682 128.274 190.26 24.25 9.13 137.41 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 8.607 .0050 .1074 .92 .68 5.29 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 178.590 127.635 .650 128.286 190.26 25.43 10.05 138.33 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 8.157 .0050 .1245 1.02 .65 5.68 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 186.747 127.676 .620 128.296 190.26 26.68 11.05 139.35 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 7.729 .0050 .1443 1.11 .62 6.10 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 194.476 127.715 .591 128.306 190.26 27.98 12.15 140.46 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 7.322 .0050 .1673 1.22 .59 6.55 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 201.798 127.752 .564 128.315 190.26 29.34 13.37 141.69 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 6.935 .0050 .1940 1.35 .56 7.03 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 208.733 127.786 .538 128.324 190.26 30.78 14.71 143.03 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 6.567 .0050 .2252 1.48 .54 7.56 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 215.300 127.819 .513 128.332 190.26 32.28 16.18 144.51 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 6.217 .0050 .2614 1.63 .51 8.12 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 221.516 127.850 .489 128.339 190.26 33.85 17.80 146.14 .00 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 5.884 .0050 .3036 1.79 .49 8.72 1.88 .013 .00 .00 BOX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 227.400 127.880 .466 128.346 190.26 35.51 19.58 147.92 2.50 2.04 12.00 2.500 12.000 .00 1 .5 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0825 .2189 .88 2.50 9.36 .013 .00 .00 BOX -------------------- WARNING - Junction Analysis - Change in Channel Type --------------- FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 4 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 231.400 128.210 1.588 129.798 190.26 35.48 19.54 149.34 .00 3.94 4.66 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 84.896 .1205 .1070 9.09 1.59 5.83 1.56 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 316.296 138.440 1.624 140.064 190.26 34.41 18.39 158.45 .00 3.94 4.68 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 66.315 .1205 .0962 6.38 1.62 5.58 1.56 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 382.611 146.432 1.681 148.113 190.26 32.81 16.72 164.83 .00 3.94 4.72 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 40.280 .1205 .0843 3.39 1.68 5.22 1.56 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 422.891 151.285 1.741 153.026 190.26 31.28 15.20 168.22 .00 3.94 4.76 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 28.282 .1205 .0738 2.09 1.74 4.88 1.56 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 451.173 154.694 1.803 156.497 190.26 29.83 13.82 170.31 .00 3.94 4.80 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 21.365 .1205 .0647 1.38 1.80 4.56 1.56 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 472.538 157.268 1.868 159.136 190.26 28.44 12.56 171.70 .00 3.94 4.84 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 16.862 .1205 .0568 .96 1.87 4.26 1.56 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 489.400 159.300 1.935 161.235 190.26 27.12 11.42 172.65 2.37 3.94 4.87 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0825 .0583 .23 4.31 3.98 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 493.400 159.630 1.797 161.427 181.47 28.58 12.68 174.11 .00 3.86 4.80 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 9.535 .0982 .0623 .59 1.80 4.38 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 5 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 502.935 160.566 1.816 162.382 181.47 28.18 12.33 174.71 .00 3.86 4.81 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 25.844 .0982 .0573 1.48 1.82 4.29 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 528.779 163.104 1.881 164.985 181.47 26.86 11.21 176.19 .00 3.86 4.84 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 19.856 .0982 .0503 1.00 1.88 4.01 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 548.635 165.053 1.949 167.002 181.47 25.61 10.19 177.19 .00 3.86 4.88 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 15.825 .0982 .0441 .70 1.95 3.75 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 564.460 166.607 2.020 168.627 181.47 24.42 9.26 177.89 .00 3.86 4.91 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 12.922 .0982 .0387 .50 2.02 3.50 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 577.382 167.876 2.093 169.969 181.47 23.29 8.42 178.39 .00 3.86 4.93 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 10.729 .0982 .0340 .36 2.09 3.26 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 588.111 168.929 2.170 171.099 181.47 22.20 7.65 178.75 .00 3.86 4.96 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 9.010 .0982 .0299 .27 2.17 3.05 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 597.122 169.814 2.251 172.064 181.47 21.17 6.96 179.02 .00 3.86 4.98 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 7.628 .0982 .0263 .20 2.25 2.84 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 604.749 170.563 2.335 172.897 181.47 20.18 6.33 179.22 .00 3.86 4.99 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 6.490 .0982 .0231 .15 2.33 2.65 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 611.239 171.200 2.422 173.622 181.47 19.24 5.75 179.37 .00 3.86 5.00 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 5.532 .0982 .0203 .11 2.42 2.47 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 6 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 616.771 171.743 2.515 174.258 181.47 18.35 5.23 179.49 .00 3.86 5.00 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 4.717 .0982 .0179 .08 2.51 2.30 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 621.488 172.206 2.611 174.817 181.47 17.49 4.75 179.57 .00 3.86 5.00 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 4.012 .0982 .0158 .06 2.61 2.14 1.60 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 625.500 172.600 2.713 175.313 181.47 16.68 4.32 179.63 5.00 3.86 4.98 5.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0925 .0151 .06 5.00 1.99 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 629.500 172.970 2.892 175.862 181.47 16.80 4.38 180.24 .00 3.90 4.31 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 10.934 .0250 .0150 .16 2.89 1.87 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 640.434 173.243 2.937 176.180 181.47 16.51 4.23 180.41 .00 3.90 4.29 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 23.314 .0250 .0139 .32 2.94 1.82 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 663.748 173.825 3.063 176.888 181.47 15.74 3.85 180.73 .00 3.90 4.20 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 16.966 .0250 .0124 .21 3.06 1.67 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 680.714 174.249 3.199 177.448 181.47 15.01 3.50 180.94 .00 3.90 4.08 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 12.259 .0250 .0111 .14 3.20 1.54 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 692.973 174.555 3.347 177.901 181.47 14.31 3.18 181.08 .00 3.90 3.93 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 8.469 .0250 .0099 .08 3.35 1.40 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 701.442 174.766 3.508 178.274 181.47 13.64 2.89 181.16 .00 3.90 3.73 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 5.138 .0250 .0090 .05 3.51 1.27 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDA-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 7 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:55:53 3668- HGL Analysis- SD-A ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 706.580 174.895 3.689 178.583 181.47 13.01 2.63 181.21 .00 3.90 3.46 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 1.820 .0250 .0082 .01 3.69 1.14 2.47 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 708.400 174.940 3.898 178.838 181.47 12.40 2.39 181.22 .00 3.90 3.06 4.500 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- FILE: SDB-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 1 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:56:26 3668- HGL Analysis- SD B ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | .000 128.050 1.648 129.698 320.22 21.86 7.42 137.12 .00 3.13 3.94 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 16.041 .0165 .0457 .73 1.65 2.00 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 16.041 128.315 1.607 129.922 320.22 22.61 7.93 137.86 .00 3.13 3.92 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 21.259 .0165 .0512 1.09 1.61 2.10 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 37.300 128.665 1.551 130.216 320.22 23.71 8.73 138.94 .00 3.13 3.90 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 19.575 .0165 .0583 1.14 1.55 2.24 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 56.875 128.988 1.497 130.485 320.22 24.87 9.60 140.09 .00 3.13 3.87 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 18.161 .0165 .0665 1.21 1.50 2.40 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 75.035 129.288 1.445 130.733 320.22 26.08 10.56 141.29 .00 3.13 3.84 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 16.951 .0165 .0759 1.29 1.45 2.57 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 91.987 129.567 1.395 130.963 320.22 27.35 11.62 142.58 .00 3.13 3.81 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 15.900 .0165 .0866 1.38 1.40 2.75 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 107.887 129.830 1.348 131.177 320.22 28.69 12.78 143.96 .00 3.13 3.78 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 14.971 .0165 .0988 1.48 1.35 2.94 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 122.858 130.077 1.302 131.378 320.22 30.09 14.06 145.44 .00 3.13 3.75 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 14.142 .0165 .1128 1.59 1.30 3.15 2.18 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 137.000 130.310 1.257 131.567 320.22 31.56 15.46 147.03 .00 3.13 3.71 4.000 .000 .00 3 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0825 .0855 .34 3.81 3.36 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDB-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 2 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:56:26 3668- HGL Analysis- SD B ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 141.000 130.640 2.395 133.035 320.04 30.40 14.35 147.38 6.00 4.88 5.88 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 53.900 .0521 .0505 2.72 6.00 4.00 2.38 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 194.900 133.450 2.400 135.850 320.04 30.30 14.26 150.11 6.00 4.88 5.88 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 54.000 .0524 .0499 2.70 6.00 3.98 2.37 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 248.900 136.280 2.409 138.689 320.04 30.15 14.11 152.80 .00 4.88 5.88 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 74.300 .0522 .0490 3.64 2.41 3.95 2.38 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 323.200 140.160 2.426 142.586 320.04 29.87 13.86 156.44 6.00 4.88 5.89 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 32.600 .0521 .0480 1.57 6.00 3.90 2.38 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 355.800 141.860 2.435 144.295 320.04 29.72 13.71 158.01 .00 4.88 5.89 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0825 .0494 .20 6.00 3.87 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 359.800 142.190 2.359 144.549 312.97 30.32 14.28 158.83 6.00 4.83 5.86 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 2.658 .0859 .0510 .14 6.00 4.03 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 362.458 142.418 2.365 144.783 312.97 30.22 14.18 158.97 6.00 4.83 5.86 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 31.442 .0859 .0476 1.50 6.00 4.01 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 393.900 145.120 2.451 147.571 312.97 28.82 12.89 160.46 .00 4.83 5.90 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 14.643 .0857 .0430 .63 2.45 3.74 2.06 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 408.543 146.375 2.501 148.876 312.97 28.05 12.22 161.10 .00 4.83 5.92 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 21.757 .0857 .0389 .85 2.50 3.60 2.06 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDB-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 3 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:56:26 3668- HGL Analysis- SD B ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 430.300 148.240 2.593 150.833 312.97 26.75 11.11 161.94 2.94 4.83 5.94 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 17.413 .0858 .0342 .60 5.53 3.36 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 447.713 149.734 2.686 152.421 312.97 25.53 10.12 162.54 2.68 4.83 5.97 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 14.722 .0858 .0301 .44 5.37 3.14 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 462.436 150.998 2.786 153.784 312.97 24.34 9.20 162.99 2.45 4.83 5.98 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 12.333 .0858 .0265 .33 5.23 2.93 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 474.768 152.056 2.891 154.947 312.97 23.21 8.37 163.31 2.23 4.83 6.00 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 10.411 .0858 .0233 .24 5.12 2.73 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 485.179 152.949 3.001 155.950 312.97 22.13 7.60 163.55 2.03 4.83 6.00 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 8.826 .0858 .0205 .18 5.03 2.54 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 494.005 153.707 3.116 156.823 312.97 21.10 6.91 163.74 1.84 4.83 6.00 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 7.495 .0858 .0181 .14 4.96 2.36 2.05 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 501.500 154.350 3.237 157.587 312.97 20.12 6.28 163.87 6.00 4.83 5.98 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- JUNCT STR .0825 .0199 .08 6.00 2.20 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 505.500 154.680 2.960 157.640 312.81 22.51 7.87 165.51 .00 4.83 6.00 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 61.615 .0295 .0218 1.34 2.96 2.61 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 567.115 156.498 3.048 159.546 312.81 21.69 7.30 166.85 .00 4.83 6.00 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 54.411 .0295 .0195 1.06 3.05 2.46 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDB-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 4 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:56:26 3668- HGL Analysis- SD B ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 621.527 158.103 3.165 161.268 312.81 20.68 6.64 167.91 .00 4.83 5.99 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 38.884 .0295 .0172 .67 3.17 2.29 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 660.410 159.250 3.289 162.539 312.81 19.72 6.04 168.57 .00 4.83 5.97 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 29.155 .0295 .0151 .44 3.29 2.13 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 689.565 160.110 3.419 163.529 312.81 18.80 5.49 169.02 .00 4.83 5.94 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 22.426 .0295 .0134 .30 3.42 1.98 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 711.992 160.772 3.556 164.328 312.81 17.92 4.99 169.32 .00 4.83 5.90 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 17.448 .0295 .0118 .21 3.56 1.84 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 729.440 161.287 3.701 164.988 312.81 17.09 4.53 169.52 .00 4.83 5.83 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 13.570 .0295 .0105 .14 3.70 1.70 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 743.009 161.687 3.855 165.542 312.81 16.29 4.12 169.66 .00 4.83 5.75 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 10.417 .0295 .0093 .10 3.86 1.57 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 753.426 161.994 4.020 166.014 312.81 15.54 3.75 169.76 .00 4.83 5.64 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 7.747 .0295 .0083 .06 4.02 1.45 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 761.173 162.223 4.196 166.419 312.81 14.81 3.41 169.83 .00 4.83 5.50 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 5.401 .0295 .0074 .04 4.20 1.33 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 766.573 162.382 4.386 166.769 312.81 14.12 3.10 169.87 .00 4.83 5.32 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 3.228 .0295 .0066 .02 4.39 1.22 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE FILE: SDB-50.WSW W S P G W - CIVILDESIGN Version 14.08 PAGE 5 Program Package Serial Number: 7131 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-24-2022 Time: 1:56:26 3668- HGL Analysis- SD B ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** | Invert | Depth | Water | Q | Vel Vel | Energy | Super |Critical|Flow Top|Height/|Base Wt| |No Wth Station | Elev | (FT) | Elev | (CFS) | (FPS) Head | Grd.El.| Elev | Depth | Width |Dia.-FT|or I.D.| ZL |Prs/Pip -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -| L/Elem |Ch Slope | | | | SF Ave| HF |SE Dpth|Froude N|Norm Dp | "N" | X-Fall| ZR |Type Ch *********|*********|********|*********|*********|*******|*******|*********|*******|********|********|*******|*******|***** |******* | | | | | | | | | | | | | 769.801 162.478 4.594 167.071 312.81 13.47 2.82 169.89 .00 4.83 5.08 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- 1.099 .0295 .0060 .01 4.59 1.11 2.75 .013 .00 .00 PIPE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 770.900 162.510 4.825 167.335 312.81 12.84 2.56 169.89 .00 4.83 4.76 6.000 .000 .00 1 .0 -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- |- Appendix 7 HEC-RAS Output HEC-RAS Plan: Node 124 -50yr River: River01 Reach: Reach01 Profile: PF 1 Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S.E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Froude # Chl Mann Wtd Chnl (cfs)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft/ft)(ft/s)(sq ft)(ft) Reach01 100 PF 1 190.89 100.00 101.00 102.60 109.85 0.277424 23.86 8.00 22.00 4.21 0.033 Reach01 99.000* PF 1 190.89 100.00 100.96 102.49 109.46 0.281568 23.39 8.16 22.26 4.21 0.033 Reach01 98.000* PF 1 190.89 99.99 100.92 102.39 109.08 0.283817 22.92 8.33 22.55 4.20 0.033 Reach01 97.000* PF 1 190.89 99.99 100.89 102.31 108.69 0.282870 22.41 8.52 22.88 4.17 0.033 Reach01 96.000* PF 1 190.89 99.98 100.85 102.22 108.30 0.280612 21.90 8.72 23.23 4.14 0.033 Reach01 95.000* PF 1 190.89 99.97 100.82 102.14 107.92 0.276386 21.38 8.93 23.60 4.09 0.033 Reach01 94.000* PF 1 190.89 99.97 100.80 102.07 107.54 0.269503 20.83 9.17 24.00 4.02 0.033 Reach01 93.000* PF 1 190.89 99.96 100.78 102.00 107.18 0.262270 20.29 9.41 24.41 3.96 0.033 Reach01 92.000* PF 1 190.89 99.96 100.77 101.94 106.82 0.252754 19.73 9.68 24.84 3.87 0.033 Reach01 91.000* PF 1 190.89 99.96 100.76 101.89 106.47 0.242928 19.18 9.95 25.28 3.79 0.033 Reach01 90.000* PF 1 190.89 99.95 100.74 101.83 106.14 0.233150 18.65 10.23 25.72 3.71 0.033 Reach01 89.000* PF 1 190.89 99.94 100.72 101.78 105.83 0.223129 18.13 10.53 26.18 3.62 0.033 Reach01 88.000* PF 1 190.89 99.94 100.72 101.73 105.52 0.211483 17.58 10.86 26.65 3.52 0.033 Reach01 87.000* PF 1 190.89 99.93 100.71 101.68 105.10 0.425251 16.81 11.36 27.20 3.35 0.049 Reach01 86.000* PF 1 190.89 99.93 100.75 101.64 104.53 0.347775 15.61 12.23 27.89 3.05 0.049 Reach01 85.000* PF 1 190.89 99.92 100.77 101.59 104.06 0.288535 14.57 13.11 28.57 2.79 0.049 Reach01 84 PF 1 190.89 99.92 100.80 101.56 103.67 0.239589 13.60 14.03 29.26 2.56 0.049 Reach01 83.000* PF 1 190.89 99.92 100.83 101.53 103.36 0.201659 12.76 14.96 29.44 2.36 0.049 Reach01 82.000* PF 1 190.89 99.91 100.85 101.48 103.09 0.171369 12.01 15.90 29.61 2.19 0.049 Reach01 81.000* PF 1 190.89 99.90 102.30 101.44 102.62 0.006957 4.54 42.06 38.42 0.52 0.049 Reach01 80.000* PF 1 190.89 99.90 102.31 102.61 0.006524 4.40 43.37 38.46 0.50 0.049 Reach01 79.000* PF 1 190.89 99.89 102.32 102.60 0.006036 4.25 44.88 38.56 0.48 0.049 Reach01 78.000* PF 1 190.89 99.89 102.32 102.59 0.005695 4.14 46.16 38.58 0.47 0.049 Reach01 77.000* PF 1 190.89 99.88 102.32 102.57 0.005295 4.00 47.67 38.67 0.45 0.049 Reach01 76.000* PF 1 190.89 99.88 102.33 101.29 102.56 0.005010 3.90 48.96 38.69 0.44 0.049 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 100 102 104 106 108 110 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 124 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 River = River01 Reach = Reach01 RS = 100 Start of D-40 instantaneously outside of storm drain pipe Station (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 Crit PF 1 WS PF 1 Ground Ineff Bank Sta .0328 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 99 100 101 102 103 104 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 124 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 River = River01 Reach = Reach01 RS = 84 D-40 End of transition from 2D wide to 3D wide Station (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 Crit PF 1 WS PF 1 Ground Ineff Bank Sta .049 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 99 100 101 102 103 104 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 124 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 River = River01 Reach = Reach01 RS = 76.000* Station (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 WS PF 1 Crit PF 1 Ground Ineff Bank Sta .049 0 5 10 15 20 25 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 124 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 Main Channel Distance (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 WS PF 1 Crit PF 1 Ground River01 Reach01 HEC-RAS Plan: Node 221 - 50 yr River: River01 Reach: Reach01 Profile: PF 1 Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S.E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Froude # Chl Mann Wtd Chnl (cfs)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft/ft)(ft/s)(sq ft)(ft) Reach01 100 PF 1 320.22 100.00 101.22 102.80 108.66 0.234991 21.87 14.64 31.32 3.49 0.038 Reach01 99.000* PF 1 320.22 100.00 101.19 102.72 108.35 0.232543 21.45 14.93 31.67 3.46 0.038 Reach01 98.000* PF 1 320.22 99.99 101.16 102.64 108.03 0.229116 21.02 15.23 32.03 3.42 0.038 Reach01 97.000* PF 1 320.22 99.99 101.14 102.58 107.72 0.223842 20.56 15.57 32.42 3.38 0.038 Reach01 96.000* PF 1 320.22 99.98 101.12 102.51 107.41 0.218772 20.13 15.91 32.82 3.33 0.038 Reach01 95.000* PF 1 320.22 99.97 101.09 102.44 107.12 0.213132 19.69 16.26 33.23 3.28 0.038 Reach01 94.000* PF 1 320.22 99.97 101.08 102.38 106.82 0.205800 19.22 16.66 33.66 3.22 0.038 Reach01 93.000* PF 1 320.22 99.96 101.06 102.32 106.54 0.199075 18.79 17.05 34.10 3.16 0.038 Reach01 92.000* PF 1 320.22 99.96 101.05 102.27 106.27 0.191080 18.32 17.48 34.55 3.09 0.038 Reach01 91.000* PF 1 320.22 99.96 101.05 102.23 106.01 0.182946 17.86 17.93 35.02 3.02 0.038 Reach01 90.000* PF 1 320.22 99.95 101.03 102.17 105.76 0.175755 17.44 18.36 35.48 2.96 0.038 Reach01 89.000* PF 1 320.22 99.94 101.01 102.12 105.52 0.168511 17.02 18.81 35.95 2.89 0.038 Reach01 88.000* PF 1 320.22 99.94 101.01 102.08 105.27 0.159279 16.55 19.35 36.45 2.81 0.038 Reach01 87.000* PF 1 320.22 99.93 101.00 102.03 105.06 0.152294 16.15 19.83 36.93 2.75 0.038 Reach01 86.000* PF 1 320.22 99.93 101.00 101.99 104.85 0.144384 15.73 20.36 37.43 2.68 0.038 Reach01 85.000* PF 1 320.22 99.92 100.99 101.95 104.64 0.137075 15.32 20.90 37.93 2.61 0.038 Reach01 84.000* PF 1 320.22 99.92 101.00 101.91 104.41 0.197535 14.80 21.63 38.49 2.51 0.047 Reach01 83.000* PF 1 320.22 99.92 101.02 101.88 104.13 0.175485 14.15 22.63 39.12 2.37 0.047 Reach01 82.000* PF 1 320.22 99.91 101.03 101.84 103.90 0.158123 13.58 23.58 39.74 2.26 0.047 Reach01 81.000* PF 1 320.22 99.90 101.04 101.80 103.68 0.142509 13.04 24.56 40.35 2.15 0.047 Reach01 80.000* PF 1 320.22 99.90 101.07 101.77 103.49 0.127122 12.49 25.65 40.99 2.04 0.047 Reach01 79.000* PF 1 320.22 99.89 102.65 101.73 103.06 0.006911 5.17 61.99 51.03 0.55 0.047 Reach01 78.000* PF 1 320.22 99.89 102.65 103.05 0.006566 5.04 63.51 51.57 0.53 0.047 Reach01 77.000* PF 1 320.22 99.88 102.66 103.03 0.006161 4.90 65.29 52.17 0.52 0.047 Reach01 76 PF 1 320.22 99.88 102.66 103.02 0.005880 4.80 66.77 52.69 0.51 0.047 Reach01 75.000* PF 1 320.22 99.87 102.67 103.01 0.005535 4.67 68.56 52.79 0.49 0.047 Reach01 74.000* PF 1 320.22 99.87 102.67 103.00 0.005296 4.57 70.03 52.81 0.48 0.047 Reach01 73.000* PF 1 320.22 99.86 102.68 101.55 102.99 0.005000 4.46 71.82 52.90 0.47 0.047 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 100 102 104 106 108 110 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 221 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 River = River01 Reach = Reach01 RS = 100 Start of D-40 instantaneously outside of storm drain pipe Station (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 Crit PF 1 WS PF 1 Ground Ineff Bank Sta .0376 970 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 1040 99 100 101 102 103 104 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 221 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 River = River01 Reach = Reach01 RS = 76 D-40 End of transition from 2D wide to 3D wide Station (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 WS PF 1 Ground Ineff Bank Sta .047 970 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 1040 99 100 101 102 103 104 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 221 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 River = River01 Reach = Reach01 RS = 73.000* Station (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 WS PF 1 Crit PF 1 Ground Ineff Bank Sta .047 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 D-40 Riprap Sizing Plan: Node 221 - 50-yr MDP 3/24/2022 Main Channel Distance (ft) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Legend EG PF 1 WS PF 1 Crit PF 1 Ground River01 Reach01 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR VWP-OP NIRVANA OWNER, LLC PHOENIX, ARIZONA SEPTEMBER 14, 2021 PROJECT NO. G2755-42-01 Project No. G2755-42-01 September 14, 2021 VWP-OP Nirvana Owner, LLC 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 305 Phoenix, Arizona 85016 Attention: Mr. Steven Schwarz Subject: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Schwarz: In accordance with your request, we have prepared this preliminary geotechnical investigation report for the proposed industrial buildings at the subject site. The site is underlain by Tertiary-age Otay Formation mantled by Very Old Paralic Deposits, alluvium, topsoil, and slope wash. Minor amounts of undocumented fill are also present on the property. This report is based on review of available published geotechnical reports and literature, a previous subsurface geotechnical exploration by others, a site reconnaissance, observations made during our field investigation performed between July 29, 2021 and August 8. 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 buildings. 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 Rodney C. Mikesell GE 2533 Rupert Adams CEG 2561 RCM:RSA:arm (e-mail) Addressee 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 Slope Wash (Unmapped) ............................................................................................................ 3 3.3 Topsoil (Unmapped) ................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Alluvium (Qal) ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.5 Terrace Deposits (Qt) ................................................................................................................. 4 3.6 Otay Formation (To) ................................................................................................................... 4 4.GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................. 4 5.GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................... 5 6.GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ...................................................................................................................... 5 6.1 Faulting and Seismicity .............................................................................................................. 5 6.2 Ground Rupture .......................................................................................................................... 7 6.3 Storm Surge, Tsunamis, and Seiches .......................................................................................... 7 6.4 Flooding ...................................................................................................................................... 8 6.5 Liquefaction ................................................................................................................................ 8 6.6 Landslides ................................................................................................................................... 8 6.7 Expansive Soil ............................................................................................................................ 8 7.CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 9 7.1 General ........................................................................................................................................ 9 7.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ......................................................................................... 10 7.3 Slope Stability ........................................................................................................................... 12 7.4 Slope Grading ........................................................................................................................... 14 7.5 Grading Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 15 7.6 Earthwork Grading Factors ....................................................................................................... 20 7.7 Subdrains .................................................................................................................................. 20 7.8 Settlement Monitoring .............................................................................................................. 22 7.9 Seismic Design Criteria ............................................................................................................ 23 7.10 Shallow Foundations ................................................................................................................ 25 7.11 Conventional Retaining Wall Recommendations ..................................................................... 29 7.12 Lateral Loading ......................................................................................................................... 32 7.13 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Retaining Walls ........................................................... 33 7.14 Soil Nail Walls .......................................................................................................................... 35 7.15 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations ................................................................................ 37 7.16 Exterior Concrete Flatwork ...................................................................................................... 39 7.17 Slope Maintenance.................................................................................................................... 41 7.18 Storm Water Management ........................................................................................................ 41 7.19 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection ..................................................................................... 42 7.20 Grading and Foundation Plan Review ...................................................................................... 42 7.21 Testing and Observation Services During Construction ........................................................... 42 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded) MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Geologic Map Figure 2, Geologic Cross Sections A-A’ through G-G’ Figure 3, Typical Buttress/Stability Fill Detail APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Figure A-1 to A-5, Logs of Large Diameter Borings Figures A-6 to A-13, 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 EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND TRENCHES PERFORMED BY OTHERS APPENDIX D SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS APPENDIX E RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LIST OF REFERENCES Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 1 - September 14, 2021 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report contains the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation for proposed industrial buildings and self-storage facility located at 821 Main Street, 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 study included performing a site reconnaissance and geologic mapping, reviewing readily available published geologic literature pertinent to the property, reviewing available geotechnical reports on this property and in the site vicinity (see List of References), and excavating and logging eight backhoe test pits and five large diameter borings. 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. Exploratory borings and trenches performed by others is provided in Appendix C. Site geologic conditions are depicted on Figure 1 (Geologic Map). A CAD file of the preliminary grading study prepared by Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates was utilized as a base map to plot geologic contacts and exploratory excavation locations. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 2 - September 14, 2021 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 subject site encompasses approximately 13 acres of undeveloped land bounded on the north by automobile salvage yards, on the west by commercial buildings, on the south by Main Street and the Otay Riverbed, and on the east by the Otay Ranch Village 3 development. The property consists of natural, south-facing sloping terrain with elevations ranging from approximately 135 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to 220 feet MSL, with ephemeral drainages at the west and east ends of the property and one in the central area of the site. A storm drain pipe outlets near the toe of a fill slope at the upstream end of the central drainage. Storm water runoff then travels through the central drainage to a storm drain inlet near the southern property line. Trash, tires and debris are present in the drainage areas. Proposed site development includes constructing four industrial buildings totaling approximately 290,500 square-feet, with associated improvements including utilities, paving, storm water management devices, and landscape improvements. One of the four proposed industrial buildings will be a self-storage facility. Proposed cuts and fills are estimated to be up to 50 feet, with proposed new slopes up to approximately 10 feet in height. Retaining walls are planned on north, south, and west sides of the site. The walls will have heights up to approximately 40 feet. A soil nail wall is planned along the majority of the northern property margin where cuts will be made to reach pad grade. In the central portion of the site the soil nail wall will transition into a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall where fill is planned to reach pad grades. Along the south and west sides of the property MSE walls are planned to create proposed pad grades. New 72-inch-diameter and 60-inch-diameter storm drains will be installed on the property to convey storm water runoff from the properties to the north to a storm drain system below Main Street. Paved parking lots and driveways are planned along the perimeter of the site. Site access will be from Nirvana Street at the northwest corner of the property. 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 prepared by 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 Otay Formation capped with Terrace Deposits, alluvium, topsoil, slope wash, and undocumented fill. A description of the soil Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 3 - September 14, 2021 and geologic conditions is provided below. Mapped geologic conditions are depicted on the Geologic Map (Figure 1), and on the Geologic Cross Sections (Figure 2). Exploratory boring and test pit logs are presented in Appendix A. 3.1 Undocumented Fill (Qudf) A prism of undocumented fill is mapped within the north-central portion of the site at the upstream end of the drainage. Some end-dumped piles of undocumented fill generally consisting of silty to clayey sand with cobbles is present on the property. Trash piles consisting of construction debris, auto parts and tires are also present at the site. Undocumented fill and trash are unsuitable for support of structural fill and improvements. Undocumented fill should be removed and replaced as compacted fill. Trash should be hauled offsite prior to grading and not mixed with the fills. 3.2 Slope Wash (Unmapped) Steep, south-facing slopes are mantled with up to two feet of Holocene-age slope wash soils consisting of loose, dry, silty sand and sandy silt with cobble. The slope wash soils obscure the contact between the Terrance Deposits and the underlying Otay Formation, and the surface outcrop of bentonitic claystone beds within the Otay Formation. The slope wash is compressible and possesses a “very low” to “high” expansion potential (expansion index of 130 or less). Slope wash should be removed during grading. Due to the limited thickness and extent of these deposits, slope wash is not shown on the Geologic Map (Figure 1). 3.3 Topsoil (Unmapped) Holocene-age topsoil is present as a relatively thin veneer locally overlying surficial and formational materials. The topsoil has a thickness of up to two feet and can be characterized as soft to stiff and loose to medium dense, dry to damp, dark brown, sandy clay to clayey sand with gravel and cobble. The topsoil is typically compressible and possesses a “very low” to “high” expansion potential (expansion index of 130 or less). Removal of the topsoil will be necessary within the limits of grading in areas supporting proposed fill or improvements. Due the limited thickness and extent of these deposits, topsoil is not shown on the Geologic Map (Figure 1). 3.4 Alluvium (Qal) Alluvium is present in the shallow, north-south trending drainages (Figure 1). The thickness of the alluvium is unknown, but previous studies indicate that it is at least five feet deep below existing grade. The alluvium generally consists of loose to medium dense to dense, silty to clayey sand with Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 4 - September 14, 2021 gravel and cobble. Removal of the alluvium will be necessary within the limits of grading in areas supporting proposed fill or improvements. 3.5 Terrace Deposits (Qt) Pleistocene-age Terrace Deposits, also referred to as Old Alluvial Deposits, cap most of the site. Terrace Deposit thickness ranges between approximately 4 to 30 feet. The Terrace Deposits are generally dense to very dense, reddish brown, silty to clayey sand with gravel and cobble. The lower portions of the unit contain higher volume of larger cobbles and boulder-sized material up to about three feet in diameter. The Terrace Deposits are suitable for the support of proposed fill and structural loads; however, select grading and/or onsite screening operations will be required to properly place the cobble- and boulder-sized material in deeper fill areas, and generate soils suitable for mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall construction. 3.6 Otay Formation (To) The Tertiary-age (upper Oligocene) Otay Formation is exposed in the lower portion of the slope adjacent to Main Street and underlies the Terrace Deposits across the site. The Otay Formation consists of dense, silty, fine- to coarse-grained sandstone, clayey and sandy siltstone, and silty claystone with continuous and discontinuous interbeds of highly expansive bentonitic claystone. The coarse-grained portions of the Otay Formation typically possess a “very low” to “low” expansion potential (expansion index of 50 or less) and adequate shear strength. The fine-grained siltstone and claystone portions of the formation can exhibit a “medium” to “very high” expansion potential (expansion index greater than 50). The Otay Formation is suitable for the support of compacted fill and structural loads. Bentonitic claystone located within 5 feet of finish pad grade or within 2 feet of the bottom of structural footings will need to be undercut during grading and placed in deeper fill areas. We identified two bentonitic claystone beds in large diameter borings, between 2 and 10 feet in thickness, extending under the site at elevations ranging between 145-155 feet MSL and 175-185 feet MSL. The bentonitic claystone beds consist of highly expansive clays, which typically exhibit low shear strength. Remolded clay seams referred to as bedding plane shears can develop on or within bentonitic claystone beds which can form landslide failure surfaces. 4. GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE Bedding attitudes observed within formational materials during logging of large diameter brings for this study, and during investigation and grading of the adjacent Otay Ranch Village 3 site to the east, are approximately horizontal to slightly dipping toward the southwest. The regional dip of sedimentary units in the eastern Chula Vista area is generally 1 to 5 degrees toward the southwest. The granular portions of the formational units are typically massive with bedding not discernible. Bentonitic Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 5 - September 14, 2021 claystones and/or bedding plane shears create a possibility for slope instability and will require stabilization during grading. It is our opinion that the site geologic structure does not present a significant geologic hazard to the proposed development of the site provided the geotechnical recommendations in this report are incorporated into design and construction. 5. GROUNDWATER We encountered seepage during the field investigation in several of our borings at depths ranging from 65 to 87 feet below existing grade (elevation 112 to 153 feet NGVD29) as shown in Table 5. The seepage depths recorded in borings LB-1 and LB-2 are considered most representative of conditions across the site. Seepage is likely a perched condition. The most likely location to encounter seepage is within the drainage areas and within backcuts for the lower retaining walls and/or stability buttresses. Although, we do not expect groundwater will significantly impact grading and construction of the planned improvements, management of seepage may be necessary if it is encountered during grading. It is not uncommon for groundwater or seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed. Groundwater and 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. TABLE 5 ESTIMATED SEEPAGE ELEVATION Boring No. Date Recorded Approximate Depth of Groundwater Below Existing Grade (feet) Approximate Elevation of Groundwater (feet, NVGD29) LB-1 7/29/2021 68 116 LB-2 7/30/2021 87 112 LB-3 7/30/2021 72* 122* LB-5 08/03/2021 65** 153** * Seepage conditions ** Inferred from boring spoils 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 6.1 Faulting and Seismicity A review of the referenced geologic materials and our knowledge of the general area indicate that the site is not underlain by active faults. A fault strand related to the potentially active La Nacion Fault is mapped on regional fault maps transecting the west property boundary. A study performed by AGS (2014) did not encounter the fault in a fault trench excavation. The La Nacion Fault is considered to be potentially active. However, it is our opinion that the potential for fault rupture on the site is considered to be low based on review of geologic literature for the area Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 6 - September 14, 2021 and our experience. Additional studies should be performed to evaluate if the fault is present on the property. An active fault is defined by the California Geological Survey (CGS) as a fault showing evidence for activity within the last 11,700 years. The site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. The 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 fault traces are shown as solid, dashed and dotted that represent well-constrained, moderately constrained and inferred, 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 7 - September 14, 2021 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. 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. 6.2 Ground Rupture The risk associated with ground rupture hazard is low due to the absence of active faults at the subject site. 6.3 Storm Surge, Tsunamis, and Seiches The site is located approximately seven miles from the Pacific Ocean and is at an elevation of about 138 feet or greater above Mean Sea Level (MSL). Therefore, the potential of storm surges and tsunami affecting the site is considered low. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 8 - September 14, 2021 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. 6.4 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 low. 6.5 Liquefaction Due to the lack of a permanent, near-surface groundwater table and the dense nature of the underlying geologic units on the property, the potential for liquefaction is low. 6.6 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 low. 6.7 Expansive Soil The fine-grained clay beds within the Otay Formation may possess a “high” to “very high” expansion potential (expansion index of 91 to greater than 130). We expect topsoil, Terrace Deposits, and sandy portions of the Otay Formation will likely possess a “medium” to “high” expansive potential (Expansion Index of 51 to 130). Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 9 - September 14, 2021 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 General 7.1.1 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. 7.1.2 The site is underlain by compressible surficial deposits consisting of undocumented fill, topsoil, slope wash, and alluvium, overlying Quaternary-age Terrace Deposits and Tertiary- age Otay Formation. We estimate the undocumented fill at the north end of the central drainage to be between ten to twenty feet thick. Topsoil and slope wash range from approximately one to four feet thick. The alluvium extends to depths greater than five feet and may be thicker in unexplored areas of the site. Minor amounts of trash and construction debris are present at the site that will require offsite disposal. 7.1.3 Undocumented fill, topsoil, slope wash, and alluvium are unsuitable in their present condition to support fill or settlement-sensitive structures and will require removal and recompaction. 7.1.4 Two bentonitic claystone beds within the Otay Formation identified as laterally continuous across the site require slope buttressing, stability fills, and consideration in wall design to provide stable slope conditions. 7.1.5 A concealed segment of the potentially active La Nacion Fault is mapped at a regional scale, crossing the western side of the property. We did not evaluate the presence or absence of this fault on the property during our investigation, but fault trenching performed by others did not identify the fault. Additional trenching will be necessary to determine if the fault crosses the property. 7.1.6 Based on the current grading plan, an east-west trending cut to fill- transition will be present at finish grade. The cut side of the transition will need to be undercut in building pads to reduce differential settlement across the transition. 7.1.7 Excavation to reach pad grades will also expose an expansive claystone bed at or near finish pad grade. The claystone bed will need to be undercut during grading where it is present within 5 feet of finish pad grade or 2 feet below the bottom of footings. Grading should be planned to bury the expansive clay in deeper fill areas, outside of wall backfill zones, and at least 15 feet from the face of slopes. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 10 - September 14, 2021 7.1.8 Gravel and cobble greater than six inches in diameter is present in portions of the Terrace Deposits. Selective grading and potentially screening will be necessary if the cobble Terrace Deposits will be utilized as MSE wall backfill. 7.1.9 We encountered seepage in exploratory borings; however, we don’t expect groundwater will be a constraint to project development. Seepage within surficial soils and formational materials may be encountered during grading operations, especially during the rainy seasons. 7.1.10 Except for possible strong seismic shaking and slope instability, 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. Slope stabilization requirements are discussed in the grading section of this report. 7.1.11 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. 7.1.12 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. 7.1.13 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 or the City right-of-way. 7.1.14 Subsurface conditions observed may be extrapolated to reflect general soil/geologic conditions; however, some variations in subsurface conditions between boring and test pit locations should be anticipated. 7.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 7.2.1 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 11 - September 14, 2021 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. 7.2.2 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. 7.2.3 Excavation of 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 and the Otay 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. 7.2.4 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 7.2.1 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” to “medium” expansion potential. Portions of the topsoil and the clay beds possess a “high” to “very high” expansion potential (EI greater than 90). TABLE 7.2.1 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 Expansive 51 – 90 Medium 91 – 130 High Greater Than 130 Very High 7.2.5 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 7.2.2 presents a summary of concrete requirements set Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 12 - September 14, 2021 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 7.2.2 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 7.2.6 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. 7.2.7 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. 7.3 Slope Stability 7.3.1 Slope stability analyses were performed to evaluate impacts the bentonitic claybeds have on the proposed project. A discussion of the slope stability analysis and the results of our analyses are discussed below and presented in Appendix D. 7.3.2 Based on our analysis, remedial grading to remove the claystone bed will be required within the existing hillside slope along the south and east sides of the property. Along the south side of the property, the backcut to enable placement of reinforcing grid for the MSE wall may sufficiently remove the claystone bed such that additional remedial removal is not required. Confirmation of this will be needed once wall design is complete and grid lengths are known. Where the wall backcut does not extend far enough into the hillside slope, additional clay bed removal will be required. The minimum removal length measured from the face of the wall is provided on the stability figures in Appendix D and cross sections on Figure 2. The front extent of the clay bed removal is shown on Figure 1. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 13 - September 14, 2021 7.3.3 On the east side of the site where the planned MSE wall terminates, a buttress will need to be constructed at the toe of the hillside slope below the planned MSE wall. The width of the required buttress measured from the toe of the slope is approximately 50 feet as shown on the Cross Section G-G (Figure 2) and on the stability figure in Appendix D. The estimated front extent of the clay bed removal is shown on Figure 1. 7.3.4 The recommended buttress/clay bed removal encompasses the area from the front key removal shown on Figure 1 and dipping into the slope at a minimum of 5 percent to the back of the recommended key width and then up at a 1:1 plane to where it intersects the existing ground surface as shown on the geologic cross sections (Figure 2). A typical buttress detail is shown on Figure 3. 7.3.5 Internal drainage of the buttress key should be constructed in accordance with Figure 3. The location of the heel drains and outlet points should be shown on the grading plans. All keyway and drainage features should be as-built in the field by the project civil engineer/surveyor. 7.3.6 A stability fill will also be needed along the top of the eastern slope where the clay bed is exposed on the slope face. The stability fill should have a minimum width of 15 feet measured from the slope face. The stability fill should include a back drain that outlets to the slope face. Subdrain cut off and head walls as shown in Section 7.7 of this report should be constructed. An outlet should be provided every approximately 100 feet of the stability fill. 7.3.7 The clay bed is expected to be present near the bottom of the wall cut along the north side of the property. The wall design will need to pin the clay bed to prevent slope instability. Geocon Incorporated can provide additional stability analysis and coordination with the wall designer, as needed. 7.3.8 Additional slope stability analysis should be performed to check buttress widths and limits once the MSE walls have been designed and grid type, location, and vertical spacing is known. Modifications to the buttress widths may be needed. Additional stability analysis should be performed on for the vertical slope supported by the soil nail wall once nail spacing and method to pin the claystone bed is known. 7.3.9 General 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. The analyses indicate planned slopes above retaining walls 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 7.3.1 presents the slope stability analysis. Slope Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 14 - September 14, 2021 stability analysis for MSE walls should be performed once the wall design is complete and grid locations and lengths are known. TABLE 7.3.1 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION Parameter Value Slope Height, H 10 Feet Slope Inclination, I (Horizontal to Vertical) 2:1 Total Soil Unit Weight, γ 130 pcf Friction Angle, 28 Degrees Cohesion, C 250 psf Slope Factor λC= (γHtan)/C 2.8 NCf (From Chart) 14 Factor of Safety = (NCfC)/(γH) 2.7 7.3.10 Table 7.3.2 presents the surficial slope stability analysis for the proposed sloping conditions. TABLE 7.3.2 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, γ 130 pcf Water Unit Weight, γW 62.4 pcf Friction Angle, 28 Degrees Cohesion, C 250 psf Factor of Safety = (C+(γ+γW )Zcos2I tan)/(γZsinI cosI) 2.2 7.3.11 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. 7.4 Slope Grading 7.4.1 Construction of fill slopes should begin with excavation of a fill slope keyway in accordance with the Fill Slope Keyway detail shown in the Recommended Grading Specifications in Appendix E. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 15 - September 14, 2021 7.4.2 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. In general, soils with an Expansion Index of less than 50 should be acceptable as “granular” fill. Soils of questionable strength to satisfy surficial stability should be tested in the laboratory for acceptable drained shear strength. 7.4.3 Fill slopes should be overbuilt at least three feet horizontally, and cut back to the design finish grade. As an alternative, fill slopes may be compacted by back-rolling at vertical intervals not to exceed four feet and then track-walking with a D-8 dozer, or equivalent, upon completion such that the fill soils are uniformly compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction to the face of the finished slope. 7.4.4 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. 7.4.5 Grading budgets should be established that include selective grading to provide suitable soil for the wall backfill, stability buttresses, as well as the outer 15 feet (or a distance equal to the height of the slope, whichever is less) of fill slopes with properly compacted granular “soil” fill to reduce the potential for slope creep and surficial sloughing. In general, soil with an EI<50 should be used within the outer slope zone. Minimum soil strength parameters for the stability buttresses is provided in the grading section. 7.5 Grading Recommendations 7.5.1 Grading should be performed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report, the Recommended Grading Specifications contained in Appendix E and the City of Chula Vista’s Grading Ordinance. Where the recommendations of this section conflict with those of Appendix E, 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. 7.5.2 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction meeting 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. 7.5.3 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 16 - September 14, 2021 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. 7.5.4 Abandoned foundations and buried utilities (if encountered) should be removed and the resulting depressions and/or trenches backfilled with properly compacted material as part of the remedial grading. 7.5.5 We recommend undocumented fill, topsoil, slope wash, and alluvium be removed to expose competent Terrace Deposits or Otay Formation 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. 7.5.6 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. 7.5.7. Removals at the toes of 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. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 17 - September 14, 2021 Typical Limit of Remedial Grading 7.5.8 Off-site grading within the adjacent property to the north will be required to remove the undocumented fill in the central drainage. Off-site grading will also be required to construct the stability buttress/fills on the eastern hillside slope. 7.5.9 Removal of the clay beds for slope stability purposes should be performed to the limits shown on Figures 1 and 2. Buttress and stability fills should be constructed as discussed in Section 7.3 of this report, Appendix D, and Figure 3. All fill placed within the buttress/stability fill area should meet the minimum strength requirement shown on the following table. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 18 - September 14, 2021 TABLE 7.5.1 RECOMMENDED SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR BUTTRESS/STABILITY FILLS Friction Angle (degrees) Cohesion (psf) 28 250 7.5.10 Grading will result in fill to formation transitions across the building pads. To reduce the potential for differential settlement, the cut portion of the transition should be over- excavated (undercut) at least 5 feet below proposed finish grade or at least two foot below the lowest foundation element, whichever is deeper, and replaced with properly compacted “very low” to “low” expansive fill soils. Overexcavations should extend to a horizontal distance of at least 5 feet beyond the edge of the building pad and cut at a gradient of one percent toward the deepest fill area to provide drainage for moisture migration along the contact between the native soil and compacted fill. 7.5.11 We expect the bentonitic clay bed will be encountered near finish subgrade across the site. The clay bed should be undercut to a depth of at least 5 feet below finish subgrade or at least 2 feet below the lowest foundation element, whichever is deeper, and replaced with properly compacted “very low” to “low” expansive fill soils. The clay bed undercut should be performed within both the building pads and below all structural improvements (pavement, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, etc.). 7.5.12 Expansive soils should be placed in deeper fill areas, outside of the foundation, reinforced and retained zones of MSE walls, and at least five feet below pad grade or two feet below the deepest foundation element, whichever is deeper. 7.5.13 A summary of grading recommendations is shown on the table below. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 19 - September 14, 2021 TABLE 7.5.2 SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL REMOVALS AND GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS Area Removal Requirements All Structural Improvement Areas Remove all undocumented fill, topsoil, slope wash, and alluvium. Overexcavate clay bed to a depth of 5 feet below finish subgrade or 2 feet below building footing (whichever is deeper) Building Pads with Cut to Fill Transition Undercut building pad 5 feet below pad grade or 2 feet below bottom of building footings (whichever is deeper) Fill Areas Expansive Soil Buried at Least 5 Feet Below Pad Grade or at Least 2 Feet Below Bottom of Footings Remedial Grading Limits 5 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 7.5.14 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. 7.5.15 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 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. 7.5.16 Imported fill (if necessary) should consist of the characteristics presented in Table 7.5.3. 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 7.5.3 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 20 - September 14, 2021 7.6 Earthwork Grading Factors 7.6.1 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 the following table 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 7.6 SHRINKAGE AND BULK FACTORS Soil Unit Shrink/Bulk Factor Undocumented Fill (Dumped; Qudf) 10-15% Shrink Undocumented Fill (Previously Compacted; Qudf) 0-3% Shrink Topsoil and slope wash (unmapped) 5-10% Shrink Alluvium (Qal) 4-10% Shrink Terrace Deposits (Qt) 0-5% Bulk Otay Formation (To) 3-5% Bulk 7.7 Subdrains 7.7.1 Subdrains should be installed in the canyon drainages that will be infilled. Typical subdrain installation details are presented below. 7.7.2 Canyon subdrains should be constructed from 6-inch Schedule 40 PVC pipe or equivalent. The approximate locations of proposed subdrains are shown on Figure 1. The recommended subdrain locations are based on anticipated site conditions prior to grading and are subject to change depending on the conditions encountered in the field.. Appropriate subdrain outlets should be evaluated prior to finalizing the grading plan. 7.7.3 The final 20-foot segment of a subdrain 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 junction in accordance with the figure below. The subdrains should be tied into the storm drain system that outlets to Main Street. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 21 - September 14, 2021 Typical Canyon Subdrain Detail Typical Cutoff Wall Detail 7.7.4 Subdrains that discharge into a natural drainage course or open space area should be provided with a permanent headwall structure as shown herein. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 22 - September 14, 2021 Typical Headwall Detail 7.7.5 The final grading plans should show the location of the proposed subdrains. Upon completion of remedial excavations and subdrain installation, the project civil engineer should survey the drain locations and prepare an “as-built” map depicting the existing conditions. The final outlet and connection locations should be determined during grading. The grading contractor should consider videoing the subdrains shortly after burial to check proper installation and to check that the pipe has not been crushed. The contractor is responsible for the performance of the drains. 7.8 Settlement Monitoring 7.8.1 At the completion of grading, the south side of the site will be underlain by up to 45 feet of compacted fill behind MSE walls. Post-grading settlement (hydro-compression) of properly compacted new fill with a maximum thickness of 45 feet could be up to about 2.5 inches. 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. 7.8.2 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. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 23 - September 14, 2021 7.8.3 Due to the height of the MSE walls, we expect some settlement/lateral wall movement will occur. This could result in cracking in flatwork and pavement placed within the reinforced and retained zones of the wall. 7.8.4 At the south end of the property where fills are the greatest, we recommend settlement monuments be installed subsequent to the MSE wall construction. A typical settlement monument is shown below. Settlement Plate Detail 7.8.5 Surveying of the surface monument should be performed by the project civil engineer every two weeks for at least four 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. 7.9 Seismic Design Criteria 7.9.1 Table 7.9.1 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 24 - September 14, 2021 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 areas underlain by more than 20 feet of fill. The northern portion of the building pads will be underlain by shallow compacted fills. Site Class C is appropriate for this condition. TABLE 7.9.1 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 0.835g 0.835g Figure 1613.2.1(1) MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response Acceleration – Class B (1 sec), S1 0.297g 0.297g Figure 1613.2.1(2) Site Coefficient, FA 1.2 1.166 Table 1613.2.3(1) Site Coefficient, FV 1.5 2.007* Table 1613.2.3(2) Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SMS 1.002g 0.973g Section 1613.2.3 (Eqn 16-36) Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response Acceleration – (1 sec), SM1 0.445g 0.595g* Section 1613.2.3 (Eqn 16-37) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SDS 0.668g 0.649g Section 1613.2.4 (Eqn 16-38) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (1 sec), SD1 0.297g 0.397g* 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. 7.9.2 Table 7.9.2 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. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 25 - September 14, 2021 TABLE 7.9.2 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 0.365g 0.365g Figure 22-7 Site Coefficient, FPGA 1.2 1.235 Table 11.8-1 Site Class Modified MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM 0.438g 0.451g Section 11.8.3 (Eqn 11.8-1) 7.9.3 Conformance to the criteria in Tables 7.9.1 and 7.9.2 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. 7.9.4 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 7.9.3 presents a summary of the risk categories. TABLE 7.9.3 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 7.10 Shallow Foundations 7.10.1 The proposed structure can be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing in compacted fill provided the grading and buttress recommendations provide in this report are followed. Foundations for the structure should consist of continuous strip footings and/or Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 26 - September 14, 2021 isolated spread footings. Table 7.10.1 provides a summary of the foundation design recommendations. TABLE 7.10.1 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 Static Differential Settlement ½ Inch in 40 Feet Footing Size Used for Settlement 8-Foot Square Design Expansion Index 50 or less 7.10.2 Additional settlement as a result of self-weight compression and hydro-compression could occur over the life of the structures. 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 7.10.2 and is in addition to the static settlement indicated on Table 7.10.1. The largest settlement over the shortest distance occurs in Buildings 2 and 3 that overlie the central drainage area. Foundations should be designed to accommodate total and differential settlement from both static loading and self-weight compression/hydro-compression. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 27 - September 14, 2021 TABLE 7.10.2 ESTIMATED FILL THICKNESS AND TOTAL AND DIFFERENTIAL FILL SETTLEMENT AS A RESULT OF SELF-WEIGHT AND HYDRO-COMPRESSION Location Estimated Compacted Fill Thickness in Building Pads (after grading) (feet) Estimated Total Settlement (Self-Weight and Hydro-Compression) (inches) Estimated Differential Settlement (Self-Weight and Hydro-Compression) (inches) Building 1 (Southwest Corner) 30 1.5 1.25 inches over a span of 130 feet (angular distortion of 1/1250) Building 1 (Northeast Half) 5 0.25 0.25 over a span of 140 feet (angular distortion of 1/6700) Building 2 (Northeast Portion) 45 2.2 2 inches over a span of 60 feet (angular distortion of 1/360) Building 2 (Southeast Portion) 50 2.4 2.2 inches over a span of 160 feet (angular distortion of 1/900 Building 2 (Western Half) 5 0.25 0.25 over a span of 120 feet (angular distortion of 1/5800) Building 3 (Southwest Corner) 40 1.9 1.7 inches over a span of 60 feet (angular distortion of 1/425) Building 3 (Northeast) 5 0.25 0.25 over a span of 110 feet (angular distortion of 1/5300) Building 4 5 0.25 NA 7.10.3 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). Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 28 - September 14, 2021 Wall/Column Footing Dimension Detail 7.10.4 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. 7.10.5 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. 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. 7.10.6 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. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 29 - September 14, 2021 7.10.7 Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by the structural engineer. 7.11 Conventional Retaining Wall Recommendations 7.11.1 Retaining walls should be designed using the values presented in Table 7.11.1. Soil with an expansion index (EI) of greater than 50 should not be used as backfill soil behind retaining walls. TABLE 6.11.1 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 7.11.2 The project retaining walls should be designed as shown in the Retaining Wall Loading Diagram. Retaining Wall Loading Diagram Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 30 - September 14, 2021 7.11.3 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. 7.11.4 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. 7.11.5 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. 7.11.6 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. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 31 - September 14, 2021 Typical Retaining Wall Drainage Detail 7.11.7 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. 7.11.8 In general, wall foundations should be designed in accordance with Table 7.11.2. 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. TABLE 7.11.2 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 32 - September 14, 2021 7.11.9 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 7.13 and 7.14. 7.11.10 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. 7.11.11 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. 7.12 Lateral Loading 7.12.1 Table 7.12 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 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 7.12 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. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 33 - September 14, 2021 7.12.2 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. 7.13 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Retaining Walls 7.13.1 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. 7.13.2 The geotechnical parameters listed in Table 7.13.1 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. Screening of onsite soil intended for MSE wall backfill may be necessary to meet maximum particle size requirements for soil used in the reinforced zone. TABLE 7.13.1 GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS FOR MSE WALLS Parameter Reinforced Zone Retained Zone Foundation Zone Angle of Internal Friction 28 degrees 28 degrees 28 degrees Cohesion 100 psf 100 psf 100 psf Wet Unit Density 130 pcf 130 pcf 130 pcf 7.13.3 The soil parameters presented in Table 7.13.1 are based on our experience and direct shear- strength tests performed during the geotechnical investigation and represent some of the on- site materials. 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). 7.13.4 Wall foundations should be designed in accordance with Table 7.13.2 The walls should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 34 - September 14, 2021 the face of the slope. The bearing zone on the MSE wall can be taken across the width of the reinforced zone. TABLE 7.13.2 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 7.13.5 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 reinforcement, and overall embedment lengths will have to be increased to account for the difference. 7.13.6 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. 7.13.7 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 35 - September 14, 2021 reinforced and retained zones of the wall will likely undergo movement for the wall heights proposed on this project. 7.13.8 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. 7.13.9 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. 7.14 Soil Nail Walls 7.14.1 We understand soil nail walls are planned for the northern property line wall. 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. 7.14.2 In general, ground conditions are moderately suited to soil nail wall construction techniques. However, localized gravel, cobble and oversized material could be encountered that may be difficult to drill. Additionally, relatively clean sands may be 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). 7.14.3 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 36 - September 14, 2021 adjusted bond length rather than testing production nails. Geocon Incorporated should observe the nail installation and perform the nail testing. 7.14.4 The soil strength parameters listed in Table 7.14 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 7.14 SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR SOIL NAIL WALLS Description Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (degrees) Estimated Ultimate Bond Stress (psi)* Compacted Fill 100 28 10 Very Old Paralic Deposits 200 33 20 Otay Formation 200 33 20 *Assuming gravity fed, open hole drilling techniques. 7.14.5 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. 7.14.6 A bentonitic clay bed is expected to be present near the bottom of the wall cut along the north side of the property. The wall design will need to pin the clay bed to prevent slope instability. Geocon Incorporated can provide additional stability analysis and coordination with the wall designer, as needed. Soil Nail Wall Drainage Detail Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 37 - September 14, 2021 7.15 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations 7.15.1 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 7.15.1. TABLE 7.15.1 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 7.15.2 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). 7.15.3 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. 7.15.4 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 7.15.2. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 38 - September 14, 2021 TABLE 7.15.2 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 7.15.5 Based on the criteria presented herein, the PCC pavement sections should have a minimum thickness as presented in Table 7.15.3. TABLE 7.15.3 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 7.15.6 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. 7.15.7 The rigid pavement should also be designed and constructed incorporating the parameters presented in Table 7.15.4. TABLE 7.15.4 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 ¼-Inch for Sealed Joints ⅜-Inch is Common for Sealed Joints 1/10- to 1/8-Inch is Common for Unsealed Joints Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 39 - September 14, 2021 7.15.8 Concrete reinforcing steel will not be necessary within the concrete for geotechnical purposes with the possible exception of dowels at construction joints as discussed herein. 7.15.9 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. 7.15.10 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 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. 7.15.11 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. 7.16 Exterior Concrete Flatwork 7.16.1 Exterior concrete flatwork not subject to vehicular traffic should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Table 7.16. The recommended steel reinforcement would help reduce the potential for cracking. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 40 - September 14, 2021 TABLE 7.16 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. 7.16.2 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. 7.16.3 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. 7.16.4 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. 7.16.5 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 41 - September 14, 2021 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. 7.17 Slope Maintenance 7.17.1 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 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. 7.18 Storm Water Management 7.18.1 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. 7.18.2 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 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 42 - September 14, 2021 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. 7.19 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection 7.19.1 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. 7.19.2 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. 7.19.3 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. 7.19.4 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. 7.20 Grading and Foundation Plan Review 7.20.1 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. 7.21 Testing and Observation Services During Construction 7.21.1 Geocon Incorporated should provide geotechnical testing and observation services during the grading operations, foundation construction, utility installation, retaining wall backfill Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 - 43 - September 14, 2021 and pavement installation. Table 7.21 presents the typical geotechnical observations we would expect for the proposed improvements. TABLE 7.21 EXPECTED GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES Construction Phase Observations Expected Time Frame Ground Modification Ground Modification Installation Full Time Confirmation Testing Part Time to Full Time Grading Base of Removal Part Time During Removals Geologic Logging Part Time to Full Time Fill Placement and Soil Compaction Full Time MSE Walls Fill Placement and Soil Compaction Full Time Tieback Anchors Tieback Drilling and Installation Full Time Tieback Testing Full Time Soil Nail Walls Soil Nail Drilling and Installation Full Time Soil Nail Testing Full Time Foundations Drilling Operations for Piles Full Time Foundation Excavation Observations Part Time Utility Backfill Fill Placement and Soil Compaction Part Time to Full Time Retaining Wall Backfill Fill Placement and Soil Compaction Part Time to Full Time Subgrade for Sidewalks, Curb/Gutter and Pavement Soil Compaction Part Time Pavement Construction Base Placement and Compaction Part Time Asphalt Concrete Placement and Compaction Full Time Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 September 14, 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. 137.9 138.1 137.5 137.2 136.2 135.9 135.1 135.1 134.4 134.2 133.5 133.2 132.4 132.2 131.5 131.3 130.7 130.5 129.9 130.2 129.6 129.4 129.9 130.8 131.7 132.3 133.8 135.5 136.9 135.6 134.7 133.8 133.1 131.8 131.2 130.2 129.7 131.2 136.9 142.8 137.5 153.2 149.4 148.6 158.6 174.3 217.2 218.6 219.7 219.9 220.3 221.7 227.9 233.7 235.5 194.2 191.9 201.5 197.3 193.5 189.4 185.5 137.6137.1135.5 134.1 181.3 179.3 180.1 178.8 178.3 176.9 177.2 175.6 187.6 211.2 219.2 218.8 218.3 220.4 221.5 219.6 235.9 236.3 204.2 202.6 203.7 201.5 202.5 202.7 194.2 193.7 193.7 193.4 192.5 193.5 190.4 192.9 191.7 192.6 190.5 187.7 179.2 180.9 168.7 175.2 144.4 142.3 164.7 166.3 165.4 163.9 163.7 201.4 205.2 235.5 219.1 218.7 LOT 23 MAP 8147 HELD RECORD ANGLE LOT 22 MAP 8147 LOT 21 MAP 8147 LOT 20 MAP 8147 LOT 19 MAP 8147 LOT 3 MAP 8147 LOT 2 SEC 20 T18S R1E SBM ROS 16999 PARCEL 1 PM 21587 PARCEL 2 PM 21587 64 ' 64 ' 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 N 87°34'46" W 1356.85' ( N 8 7 ° 3 4 ' 0 8 " W 1 3 5 6 . 6 6 ' R 2 ) N 02°26'11" E 0.15' N 02°25'25" E 0.13' N 0 2 ° 2 6 ' 1 1 " E 2 7 6 . 9 1 ' ( N 0 2 ° 2 5 ' 1 5 2 E 2 7 6 . 7 9 ' R 2 ) 749.13' 607.72' N 0 0 ° 1 4 ' 3 2 " E 2 8 7 . 7 3 ' ( N 0 0 ° 1 2 ' 1 0 " E 2 8 7 . 5 2 ' R 2 ) N 0 0 ° 2 7 ' 0 5 " E 4 2 4 . 2 3 ' ( N 0 0 ° 2 7 ' 2 8 " E 4 2 4 . 2 4 ' R 2 ) L =2 9 9 .2 0 ' R =2 0 6 4 .0 0 ' D =8 °1 8 '2 0 " M &R 2 N 82°38'33" E 3 7 3 . 1 3 ' ( N 8 2 ° 3 8 ' 3 6 " E 3 7 3 . 1 5 ' R 2 ) D =2 °0 9 '1 1 " M &R 2L=7 7 .5 5 ' L =5 9 7 .1 7 ' D =1 6 °3 4 '3 8 " M &R 2L=6 7 4 .7 0 ' R =2 0 6 4 .0 0 ' D =1 8 °4 3 '4 6 " M &R 2 N 78°37' 4 1 " W 2 3 . 9 7 ' (N 78°3 7 ' 3 8 " W 2 3 . 9 8 ' R 2 ) NW COR SW 1/4 NW 1/4 SEC 20 2'1 25'2 NE COR SW 1/4 NW 1/4 SEC 20 3 27' 15' 28' 20' 28'5 5 5 5 5 12 8 ' 7 7 2 0 ' 1 4 24'13 20' 13 24 ' 12 1 2 ' 1 24'1 24'2 6 4 ' 6 4 ' 3 4 33' 34' 12'4 5 4 4 4 6 7 (137.94 FG) (131.82 FG) 183.0 TW 141.5 FG H=41.5' 184.0 TW 145.0 FG H=39' 183.1 TW 162.5 FG H=20.6' 189.75 TW 183.5 BW H=6.25' 185.25 TW 146.2 FG H=39.1'MAIN STREET 2: 1 2 : 1 2 : 1 2 : 1 202.5 TW 184.5 FG H=18'205.75 TW 185.75 FG H=20' 184.00 TW 184.00 FG H=0' 212.25 TW 186.75 FG H=25.5' 180.9 TW 155.6 FG H=25.3' 180.9 TW 139.4 FG H=41.5' (139.7 FG) (186.00 FG) (186.00 FG) INDUSTRIAL BLDG 4 187.5 FF 186.0 TW 186.0 BW H=0' 189.5 TW 184.5 FG H=5' 186.0 TW 186.0 FS H=0' 186.25 TW 146.9 FG H=39.4' 187.0 TW 183.3 FS H=3.7' 186.25 TW 159.1 FG H=27.2' TYPE A-6 CO 188.8 RIM 172.60 IE OUT MOD. TYPE A-6 CO 135.32 TOP 129.38 FL MOD. TYPE A-8 CO WITH TYPE F OPENING 175.0 TOP 154.35 IE OUT MOD. TYPE A CO 137.63 TOP 130.64 FL 183.75 FS 5% NI R V A N A A V E INDUSTRIAL BLDG 3 186.5 FF INDUSTRIAL BLDG 2 185.25 FF INDUSTRIAL BLDG 1 184.25 FF 182.9 TW 141.4 FG H=41.5' 184.0 TW 143.5 FG H=40.5' 184.0 TW 144.3 FG H=39.7' 185.25 TW 146.5 FG H=38.8' 186.25 TW 145.9 FG H=40.4' 184.0 TW 184.0 BW H=0' 187.0 TW 183.6 FS H=3.4' 187.0 TW 183.4 FS H=3.6' 2: 1 2: 1 2 : 1 2 . 0 % 198.5 TW 183.5 BW H=15' 202.0 TW 183.5 BW H=18.5' 202.5 TW 183.5 BW H=19' 200.5 TW 184.5 FG H=16' 184.5 TW 184.5 FG H=0' 203.0 TW 184.5 FG H=18.5' 206.25 TW 185.75 FG H=20.5' 209.25 TW 185.75 FG H=23.5' 211.0 TW 185.75 FG H=25.25'211.25 TW 186.75 FG H=24.5' 210.0 TW 186.75 FG H=23.25' 208.25 TW 186.75 FG H=21.5' 191.75 TW 186.75 FG H=5' 184.5 TW 184.5 FG H=0' 189.5 TW 184.5 FG H=5' 212.25 TW 186.25 FG H=26' 212.0 TW 185.75 FG H=26.25' 2 . 0 % 2 . 0 % 2. 0 % 2. 0 % A A' B B' Qal Qt Qt Qt Qt Qal To To Qal Qal Qt B-1 B-2 T-5 T-4 T-6 T-3 T-2 T-1 TP-2 TP-4 TP-3 TP-1 TP-7 TP-6 TP-5To To To To To To To To ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Qudf C C' D D' LB-4 LB-3 LB-2 LB-1 LB-5 G G ' E E' F F' TP-5 TP-8 TP-1 TP-3 TP-2 TP-4 TP-6 TP-7 To Qt Qt APPROX. FRONT LIMIT OF CLAYBED REMOVAL APPROX. FRONT LIMIT OF CLAYBED REMOVAL PROJECT NO. SCALE DATE FIGURE SHEET OF Plotted:09/14/2021 8:36AM | By:ALVIN LADRILLONO | File Location:Y:\PROJECTS\G2755-42-01 (Nirvana Self Storage)\SHEETS\G2755-42-01 Geo Map.dwg GEOLOGIC MAP NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 50'09 - 14 - 2021 G2755 - 42 - 01 1 1 1 *LA2(E67 (6I:E  7A2 (IEGO CALI*O62IA    P,O2E    *A<   GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS 1" = T-6 TP-7 B-2 ........UNDOCUMENTED FILL ........ALLUVIUM ........TERRACE DEPOSITS ........OTAY FORMATION ........APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT ........APPROX. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY LARGE DIAMETER BORING (Current) ........APPROX. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING ........APPROX. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY TEST PIT (Current) ........APPROX. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY TEST PIT (AGS, 2014) ........APPROX. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY TEST PIT (AET, 2008) ........APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION ........APPROX. LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDRAIN ........APPROX. SURFACE EXPOSURE OF BENTONITIC CLAYSTONE GEOCON LEGEND Qudf G G' Qal Qt To LB-5 TP-8 0 10050 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 50 100 150 200 250 B 300 B' E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) 50 100 150 200 250 300 D I S T A N C E SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION B-B' 0 10050 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 50 100 150 200 250 A 300 A' E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) 50 100 150 200 250 300 D I S T A N C E SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION A-A' PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED RETAINING WALL EXISTING GRADED PROPOSED GRADE PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADED To SOUTH S12°E SM CH SM-ML CH CH ??? ? 0 10050 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 50 100 150 200 250 C 300 C' E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) 50 100 150 200 250 300 D I S T A N C E SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION C-C' 50 100 150 200 250 D 300 D' E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) 50 100 150 200 250 300 SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION D-D' 0 10050 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 600500550 650 700 750 800 950850900 1000 11001050 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 160015001550 1650 1700 1750 1800 195018501900 Qt Qt To SECTION D-D' SECTION D-D' LB-4 (Projected 50') SM CH CH SC-GC SM-ML Qt To LP EXISTING GRADED PROPOSED GRADE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED RETAINING WALL SM CH CH SM-ML LB-5 Qt Qt ToTo LP LP EXISTING GRADED PROPOSED GRADE LB-2 (Projected 22') LB-4 (Projected 31')LB-5 SECTION A-A' SECTION C-C' SM CH CH ML SM CH CH ML PROPOSED RETAINING WALL Qt Qt Qt QtQt SM CH CH ML 0 10050 150 200 F F E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) D I S T A N C E SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION F-F' 0 10050 150 200 250 100 150 200 E E' E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) 100 150 200 D I S T A N C E SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION E-E' 0 10050 150 200 G G' E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) D I S T A N C E SCALE: 1" = 50' (Vert. = Horiz.) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION G-G' 250 250 100 150 200 E L E V A T I O N ( M S L ) 250 100 150 200 250 100 150 200 250 GW Qt LP LP MAIN STREET PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 3 To SM GP SC-ML ? ? LP MAIN STREET To To To PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 2 LP LB-1 (Projected 55' to Section) SOUTH SC-GC GW-GC To To LP MAIN STREET PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 4 ?? ? GM-SM LB-3 (Projected 20')GM-SM SM GW-GC SC-GC SM CH SM-ML SC-GC CH EAST SECTION B-B' SECTION D-D' To To To To To ToTo To To SM CH CH GM-SM ML GW-GC S58ºE LP PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 4 SM CH SM-GM ML GW-GC S80ºE Qt Qt To To ToToTo To S25ºE PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 4 SM CH GM-SM ML GW-GC CH CH PROPOSED RETAINING WALL EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADEEXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE PROPOSED GRADE 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT NO. SCALE DATE FIGURE GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS SHEET OF Plotted:09/14/2021 8:26AM | By:ALVIN LADRILLONO | File Location:Y:\PROJECTS\G2755-42-01 (Nirvana Self Storage)\SHEETS\G2755-42-01 XSections.dwg GEOLOGIC 1AP NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 50'09 - 14 - 2021 G2755 - 42 - 01 1 1 2 B-5 ? 1" = ........TERRACE DEPOSITS ........OTAY FORMATION ........APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Queried Where Uncertain) ........APPROX. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY LARGE DIAMETER BORING .........ESTIMATED CLAYSTONE AND BEDROCK REMEDIAL REMOVAL GEOCON LEGEND Qt To 1 1 2 1 1 1 5% Min. DETAIL 2" MIN. 1.5' MIN. 1.5' MIN. BUTTRESS WIDTH FI L L (N O T E 3 ) MIN. DEPTH SEE NOTE 2 FINISHED SLOPE SEE DETAIL NOTE 4 NOTE 4 NOTE 5 NOTE 6 NOTE 1 NOTES: 1.....EXCAVATE BACKCUT AT 1:1 INCLINATION (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED). 2.....BASE OF BUTTRESS FILL TO BE 3 FEET INTO FORMATIONAL MATERIAL OR 5 FEET BELOW BEDDING PLANE SHEAR OR LANDSLIDE SLIP SURFACE SLOPING A MINIMUM 5% INTO SLOPE. 3.....BUTTRESS/STABILITY FILL TO BE COMPOSED OF PROPERLY COMPACTED GRANULAR SOIL. 4.....CHIMNEY DRAINS TO BE APPROVED PREFABRICATED CHIMNEY DRAIN PANELS (MIRADRAIN G200N OR EQUIVALENT) SPACED APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET CENTER TO CENTER AND 4 FEET WIDE. CLOSER SPACING MAY BE REQUIRED IF SEEPAGE IS ENCOUNTERED. 5.....FILTER MATERIAL TO BE 3/4-INCH, OPEN-GRADED CRUSHED ROCK ENCLOSED IN APPROVED FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140NC). 6.....COLLECTOR PIPE TO BE 4-INCH MINIMUM DIAMETER, PERFORATED, THICK-WALLED PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT, AND SLOPED TO DRAIN AT 1 PERCENT MINIMUM TO APPROVED OUTLET. Slope to Drain MATERIAL FORMATIONAL FIG. 3 TYPICAL BUTTRESS/STABILITY FILL DETAIL 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 DSK/GTYPD PROJECT NO. G2755 - 42 - 01RM / AML NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS Plotted:09/14/2021 8:23AM | By:ALVIN LADRILLONO | File Location:Y:\PROJECTS\G2755-42-01 (Nirvana Self Storage)\DETAILS\Typical Slope Fill.dwg DATE 09 - 14 - 2021 APPENDIX A Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 September 14, 2021 APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION We performed our field investigation between July 29 and August 8, 2021. Our investigation consisted of a site reconnaissance, logging of eight exploratory test pits and five large diameter borings. The exploratory test pits were excavated to depths between 2- and 11-feet using a rubber-tire Caterpillar 430F backhoe. Exploratory borings were drilled to depths between 70- and 90-feet using a truck- mounted bucket auger drill rig. 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-5, and test pit logs are presented on Figures A-6 through A-13. The logs depict the various soil types encountered and indicate the depths at which samples were obtained. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Stiff, dry to damp, brown, Sandy CLAY; abundant caliche; few roots Medium dense, damp, grayish brown, Clayey SAND; few subrounded gravel; little caliche Medium dense to dense, damp, grayish brown, Clayey, medium to coarse SAND; interbedded with coarse sandy gravel beds; trace subrounded cobble up to 6-inch diameter; some cross-bedding Stiff, damp, grayish brown to olive brown, Clayey SILT; massive; trace fine gravel -At 18 feet: few 4"-6" thick sandy gravel interbeds; horizontal Medium dense to dense, damp, yellowish brown to orangish brown, coarse Sandy GRAVEL; gravel and cobble up to 12-inch diameter, subrounded to subangular: Hole belled out to 60" CL SC SC ML GP LB1-1 LB1-2 LB1-3 4 6/8" 3 ... 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-1, Log of Boring LB 1, Page 1 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 1 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-29-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)184' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry to damp, yellowish gray, SILTSTONE; massive Stiff to hard, damp to moist, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; moderately; fissured but not remolded Dense to very dense, damp, yellowish brown to grayish brown (mottled), Silty, fine- to medium-grained SANDSTONE; massive At 45 feet: becomes yellowish brown to reddish brown Very dense, damp, grayish white, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; trace clay, massive At 58 feet: becomes moist to wet ML CH SM SM LB1-4 LB1-5 LB1-6 LB1-7 LB1-8 10/10" 10/8" 10/10" ... 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-1, Log of Boring LB 1, Page 2 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 1 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-29-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)184' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 At 63 feet: seepage At 68 feet; standing water BORING TERMINATED AT 70 FEET Groundwater encountered at 68 Backfilled on 07-29-2021 SMLB1-9 12 ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 60 62 64 66 68 70 Figure A-1, Log of Boring LB 1, Page 3 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 1 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-29-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)184' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 TOPSOIL Stiff, dry to damp, brown, Sandy CLAY; subrounded cobble up to 6-inch diameter TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Medium dense, damp, grayish brown, Silty SAND; trace clay, trace gravel At 6 feet: subrounded cobble layer Dense, damp, orangish brown, coarse Sandy GRAVEL; subrounded gravel and cobble up to 10-inch diameter OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard to very hard, damp, dark reddish brown to pinkish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; weakly to moderately fissured with many polished and striated surfaces, occasional discontinuous anastomosing clay films that are remolded plastic and remolded up to 1/2-inch thick At 17 feet: 1/32-inch moderately remolded plastic clay seam; horizontal to undulatory with polished parting surfaces only Very dense, damp, reddish brown to grayish brown, Silty, medium coarse SANDSTONE; trace clay, massive Very dense, dry to damp, light brown, very coarse grained SANDSTONE; CL SM GP CH SM SW ... 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 2, Page 1 of 4 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 2 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)199' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 bedding horizontal Very hard, damp, grayish white to pinkish brown, fine grained Sandy SILTSTONE; massive, gunbarrel Very dense, damp, yellowish brown, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive gunbarrel Hard, damp, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; weakly fissured, no obvious clay films Very dense,damp, grayish brown, Silty, fine SANDSTONE; massive Hard, damp, dark reddish brown to pinkish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; massive, weakly to moderately fissured with polished and striated parting surfaces, occasional pockets of highly fissured claystone and weakly remolded clay Very dense, damp, grayish brown, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; massive ML-SM SM CH SM CH SM LB2-1 LB2-2 LB2-3 10/8" 10/10" ... 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-2, Log of Boring LB 2, Page 2 of 4 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 2 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)199' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 At 62 feet: becomes moist At 69 feet: 4" thick subrounded gravel layer, bedding horizontal At 70 feet: becomes moist to wet At 78 feet: moderate of heavy seepage At 87 feet: standing water SMLB2-4 LB2-5 12/8" 15/10" ... 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 2, Page 3 of 4 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 2 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)199' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 BORING TERMINATED AT 90 FEET Groundwater encountered at 87 Backfilled on 07-30-2021 ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET Figure A-2, Log of Boring LB 2, Page 4 of 4 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 2 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)199' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 TOPSOIL Stiff, damp, reddish brown, Sandy CLAY; some gravel, few roots TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Dense, dry to damp, orangish brown, Silty, medium to coarse SAND; some subrounded gravel and cobble up to 12-inch diameter OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry, reddish brown, CLAYSTONE; numerous sub horizontal to undulatory remolded moderately fissured soft plastic 1/8" thick clay films Hard, dry to damp, grayish brown to pinkish brown, very fine grained Sandy SILTSTONE; massive; few subvertical clay filled fractures Hard, damp, pinkish brown to reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; moderately to well fissured with numerous polished parting surfaces At 18 feet: transitions to fine grained sandy claystone Hard, dry to damp, pale whitish brow to pinkish brown, fine grained Sandy SILTSTONE; minor caliche along top contact; massive, few of reddish brown sandy claystone interbeds CL SM CH ML CH ML LB3-1 ... 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 3, Page 1 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 3 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)194' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 At 35-38 feet: Few high-angle clay filled fractures Stiff to hard, damp, reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; friable in places, weakly fissured, top contact is transitional over 18", no obvious remolding or plastic clay films At 42 feet: thin band of caliche cementation At 47 feet: becomes moderately fissured Hard, damp, pinkish brown to grayish white, very fine grained Sandy SILTSTONE; massive Very dense, damp, grayish white to pinkish white, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; massive ML CH ML SM ... 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 3, Page 2 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 3 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)194' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 At 65 feet: becomes damp to moist At 71 feet: 6-inch subrounded cobble bed; N70E/3°S At 72 feet: light seepage BORING TERMINATED AT 75 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 07-30-2021 SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 Figure A-3, Log of Boring LB 3, Page 3 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 3 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.07-30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)194' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Dense, dry to moist, orangish brown, Clayey, medium to coarse SAND with gravel and cobble, subrounded gravel and cobble up to 18-inch diameter Loose to medium dense, damp, orangish brown, Sandy GRAVEL; low cohesions present in cave zone, caving to 72-inch diameter, cobble and boulders up to 36 inches SC GW LB4-1 ... 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-4, Log of Boring LB 4, Page 1 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 4 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-02-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)216' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 OTAY FORMATION (To) Firm to stiff, damp, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; weakly to moderately fissured with some polished and slanted parting surfaces, little to no remolding or soft plastic zones, massive Hard, damp, dark reddish brown, Sandy CLAYSTONE Very dense, damp, reddish brown, very coarse SANDSTONE (gritstone bed); cemented, few rounded gravel Stiff to hard, damp to moist, pale reddish brown to olive brown, SILTSTONE, Clayey SILTSTONE and Sandy SILTSTONE (interbedded); massive CH CL SW ML LB4-2 LB4-3 LB4-4 8/8" 10 12 ... 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-4, Log of Boring LB 4, Page 2 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 4 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-02-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)216' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 Very stiff to hard, damp, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; weakly to moderately fissured, blocky texture, no remolding Stiff to hard, damp, reddish brown, Clayey SILTSTONE; massive Dense to very dense, damp, reddish brown to pinkish white, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; trace clay, massive BORING TERMINATED AT 81 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-02-2021 CH ML SM LB4-5 LB4-6 LB4-7 15 15 20/6" ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 Figure A-4, Log of Boring LB 4, Page 3 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 4 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-02-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)216' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 TOPSOIL Stiff, dry, dark brown, Sandy CLAY; trace gravel TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Medium dense to dense, damp, brown to orangish brown, Silty, medium coarse SAND; trace clay, some subrounded gravel and cobble up to 8-inch diameter At 26-32 feet: hole belled out to 60-inch diameter with abundant loose cobble and overhanging areas. Hole logged from cuttings below 32 feet CL GW ... 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-5, Log of Boring LB 5, Page 1 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 5 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-03-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)218' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, damp, grayish brown, Clayey SILTSTONE Hard, damp, reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; blocky, weakly fissured Hard, damp, brown to olive brown, interbedded SILTSTONE, Clayey SILTSTONE, and Silty CLAYSTONE At 50 feet: light to moderate seepage GW ML CH ML/CL LB5-1 LB5-2 LB5-3 ... 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-5, Log of Boring LB 5, Page 2 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 5 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-03-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)218' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 Hard, damp, reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; massive, blocky and weakly fissured Dense, damp, pale yellowish brown, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; massive BORING TERMINATED AT 80 FEET Groundwater encountered at 65 Backfilled on 08-04-2021 ML/CL CH SM LB5-4 LB5-5 LB5-6 ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 Figure A-5, Log of Boring LB 5, Page 3 of 3 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) BORING LB 5 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-03-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)218' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 SLOPEWASH Loose, dry, brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND with subrounded gravel and cobble OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry, reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; dessicated and fractured with blocky texture, some caliche; Bedding: <2º dip/sub-horizontal TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SC CL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-6, Log of Test Pit TP 1, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 1 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-150' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 SLOPEWASH Loose, dry, light brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND with gravel OTAY FORMATION (To) Dense, dry to damp, pinkish brown, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; massive TRENCH TERMINATED AT 5 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SC SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 Figure A-7, Log of Test Pit TP 2, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 2 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-145' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 SLOPEWASH Loose, dry, brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND with subrounded gravel and cobble OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; dessicated and fractured with blocky texture, abundant caliche Dense, dry to damp, pinkish brown, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; massive TRENCH TERMINATED AT 5 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SC CL SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 Figure A-8, Log of Test Pit TP 3, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 3 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-145' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 SLOPEWASH Loose, dry, brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND with subrounded gravel and cobble OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE Dense, dry, pale yellowish brown, Silty, medium grained SANDSTONE TRENCH TERMINATED AT 6 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SC CL SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-9, Log of Test Pit TP 4, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 4 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-145' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 OTAY FORMATION (To) Dense, dry, pale whitish brown, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; fractured, some caliche TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-10, Log of Test Pit TP 5, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 5 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-145' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 OTAY FORMATION (To) Dense, dry to damp, pale whitish yellow to pinkish white, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; fractured, trace caliche TRENCH TERMINATED AT 6 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-11, Log of Test Pit TP 6, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 6 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-140' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 SLOPEWASH Loose, dry, brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND with subrounded gravel and cobble OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry to damp, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; friable, weathered Dense, dry to damp, pale yellowish brown, Silty, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; massive TRENCH TERMINATED AT 11 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 SC CL SM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 Figure A-12, Log of Test Pit TP 7, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 7 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-150' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 OTAY FORMATION (To) Hard, dry, dark reddish brown, bentonitic CLAYSTONE; friable, some caliche TRENCH TERMINATED AT 6 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 08-05-2021 CL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-13, Log of Test Pit TP 8, Page 1 of 1 DR Y D E N S I T Y (P . C . F . ) ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) CAT 430L BACKHOE PE N E T R A T I O N RE S I S T A N C E (B L O W S / F T . ) TEST PIT TP 8 ... CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS (USCS) GR O U N D W A T E R R. ADAMS CO N T E N T ( % ) SAMPLE NO.08-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MO I S T U R E BY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)+/-145' G2755-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LI T H O L O G Y ... 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. G2755-42-01 APPENDIX B Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 B-1 September 14, 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, gradation, Atterberg limits, soluble sulfate content, chloride content, pH and resistivity, and shear strength. The results of these tests are summarized on the following tables and figures. 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.) LB3-1 Brown clayey fine to coarse SAND; some gravel (SC) 127.2 10.4 LB4-1 Brown fine to coarse sandy GRAVEL; little silt (GW) 135.8 7.0 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4829-03 Sample No. Moisture Content Dry Density (pcf) Expansion Index Before Test (%) After Test (%) LB2-3 14.8 33.6 91.8 55 LB4-1 7.7 14.1 117.8 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. 417 Sample No. Water-Soluble Sulfate (%) Sulfate Exposure LB4-1 0.028 S0 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 B-2 September 14, 2021 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE CHLORIDE ION CONTENT TEST RESULTS AASHTO TEST NO. T 291 Sample No. Chloride Ion Content ppm (%) LB4-1 937 (0.094) SUMMARY OF LABORATORY POTENTIAL OF HYDROGEN (PH) AND RESISTIVITY TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643 Sample No. Geologic Unit pH Minimum Resistivity (ohm-centimeters) LB4-1 Qt 7.56 460 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4318 Sample No. Liquid Limit (%) Plastic Limit (%) Plasticity Index LB2-3 57 26 31 LB3-1 50 18 32 LB4-1 30 19 11 LB5-1 56 24 32 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 11.6 10.5 9.1 10.4 114.6 107.2 109.0 110.3 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 16.8 19.5 17.7 18.0 1466 1765 3111 -- 1030 1759 3111 -- 790 30 350 35 DRY DENSITY (PCF): NIRVANA G2755-42-01 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.: Qt N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB1-3 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 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) 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 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) SAMPLE NO.: GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): NATURAL/REMOLDED: 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 890 2030 4300 -- 10.8 11.2 10.5 10.8 114.1 114.1 114.6 114.3 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 20.3 20.9 21.3 20.8 867 1320 2140 -- 858 1320 2131 -- 550 20 540 20 COHESION, C (PSF) DRY DENSITY (PCF): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS LB3-1 G2755-42-01 NIRVANA 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 Qt 3' 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 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) 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 1K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) SAMPLE NO.: GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): NATURAL/REMOLDED: 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 890 2030 4300 -- 6.2 6.5 6.2 6.3 122.9 123.4 123.5 123.3 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 11.5 12.1 12.6 12.1 1112 2036 3394 -- 1009 1763 3111 -- 590 33 480 32 COHESION, C (PSF) DRY DENSITY (PCF): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS LB4-1 G2755-42-01 NIRVANA 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 Qt 9' 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 4000 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) 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 1K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 4 K 1 K 2 K AVERAGE 4000 1000 2000 -- 21.0 20.0 21.0 20.7 109.8 108.4 104.7 107.7 4 K 1 K 2 K AVERAGE 24.5 23.5 25.1 24.4 3592 1498 1937 -- 2292 764 1573 -- 670 36 200 30 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 To N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB4-2 30.5' GEOLOGIC UNIT: NATURAL/REMOLDED: DRY DENSITY (PCF): NIRVANA G2755-42-01 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.: ‐500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION (IN) 4 K 1 K 2 K 4 K PEAK 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K ULTIMATE 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 2 K 1 K 4 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 14.0 13.8 13.5 13.8 119.4 121.1 120.4 120.3 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 19.8 19.6 19.3 19.6 1284 1895 3400 -- 1024 1615 3068 -- 530 35 300 34 DRY DENSITY (PCF): NIRVANA G2755-42-01 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.: To N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB5-3 50' 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 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) 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 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 17.3 18.0 17.5 17.6 112.1 113.3 112.4 112.6 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 23.0 23.5 23.1 23.2 744 1905 2857 -- 741 1329 2766 -- 270 34 22 34 DRY DENSITY (PCF): NIRVANA G2755-42-01 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.: To N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB5-5 65' 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 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) 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 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R   S T R E S S   ( P S F ) NORMAL STRESS (PSF) To D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) 0.00017 0.00189 0.00921 GEOLOGIC UNIT: 46' LB2-3 SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.): SAMPLE NO.: SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 & D 422 NIRVANA PROJECT NO.: Cc 2.3 Cu 53.7 G2755-42-01 SOIL DESCRIPTION CLAY TEST DATA U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 3"2"1½ " 1 ¾"½"⅜" #4 #8 #1 0 #1 6 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #5 0 #6 0 #8 0 #1 0 0 #2 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110100 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G PARTICLE SIZE (mm) SILT OR CLAY GRAVEL SAND COARSEFINECOARSE MEDIUM FINE Qt D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) 0.027 0.139 1.882 Cc 0.4 TEST DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION SC - Clayey SAND with gravel68.6 Cu SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 NIRVANA PROJECT NO.: U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE G2755-42-01 SAMPLE NO.:LB3-1 GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.):3 6"5"4"3"2" 1- 1 / 2 " 1"3/ 4 " 1/ 2 " 3/ 8 " #4 #8 #1 0 #1 6 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #5 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #2 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.11101001000 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G PARTICLE SIZE (mm) SAND SILT OR CLAYCOARSEFINECOARSEMEDIUMFINE GRAVEL Qt D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) 0.101 0.878 10.066 SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 NIRVANA PROJECT NO.: U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE G2755-42-01 SAMPLE NO.:LB4-1 GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.):9' Cc 0.8 TEST DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION GP-GC - Poorly graded GRAVEL with clay and sand99.6 Cu 6"5"4"3"2" 1- 1 / 2 " 1"3/ 4 " 1/ 2 " 3/ 8 " #4 #8 #1 0 #1 6 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #5 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #2 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.11101001000 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G PARTICLE SIZE (mm) SAND SILT OR CLAYCOARSEFINECOARSEMEDIUMFINE GRAVEL To D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) 0.00116 0.00226 0.00658 GEOLOGIC UNIT: 35' LB5-1 SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.): SAMPLE NO.: SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 & D 422 NIRVANA PROJECT NO.: Cc 0.7 Cu 5.7 G2755-42-01 SOIL DESCRIPTION CLAY TEST DATA U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 3"2"1½ " 1 ¾"½"⅜" #4 #8 #1 0 #1 6 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #5 0 #6 0 #8 0 #1 0 0 #2 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110100 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G PARTICLE SIZE (mm) SILT OR CLAY GRAVEL SAND COARSEFINECOARSE MEDIUM FINE APPENDIX C APPENDIX C EXPLORATORY BORINGS, TRENCHES AND LABORATORY PERFORMED BY OTHERS FOR NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. G2755-42-01 September 26, 2014 Page 1 P/W 1404-05 Report No. 1404-05-B-2 Project Chula Vista Energy Park Date Excavated 8/12/2014 Logged by PWM Equipment Cat 330C Trackhoe LOG OF TEST PITS Test Pit No. Depth (ft.) USCS Description TP-1 0.0 – 3.0 SC Topsoil: CLAYEY SAND, fine to coarse grained, grayish brown, dry, loose; some gravel and cobbles up to 10 in. diameter; white carbonate development from 2 to 3 ft. bgs. 3.0 – 11.0 CL Older Alluvium (Qoal): SILTY CLAY, grayish brown to gray, slightly moist, very stiff. @4.5 ft. abundant cobbles and small boulders; hard. @ 7.5 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine to medium grained, pale brown to olive gray, slightly moist, moderately hard; highly weathered; carbonate development. @8.5 ft. becomes pale yellowish brown, slightly moist, moderately hard to hard; with occasional gravel to small cobble. @10.0 ft. becomes hard; tight digging. TOTAL DEPTH 11.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING Plate B-1 September 26, 2014 Page 2 P/W 1404-05 Report No. 1404-05-B-2 Test Pit No. Depth (ft.) USCS Description TP-2 0.0 – 1.5 SC Topsoil: CLAYEY SAND with silt, fine to medium grained, grayish brown, dry, loose. 1.5 – 14.0 CL Older Alluvium (Qoal): SILTY to SANDY CLAY, brown to reddish brown, slightly moist, stiff; porous; occasional subrounded to subangular cobbles; white carbonate development; root hairs. 6.0 – 16.0 SC @ 6.0 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, pale yellowish brown, slightly moist, loose to moderately dense; highly weathered; carbonate development; iron oxide development; occasional subrounded to subangular cobbles. @ 7.0 ft. SILTY to CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, pale yellowish brown, slightly moist, moderately dense; weakly cemented, hand friable, abundant iron oxide staining, occasional small cobbles to 6 in. diameter. @ 11.0 ft. becomes fine to coarse grained, grayish brown, dense, slightly moist; occasional brown claystone clasts, weakly cemented. @ 13.0 ft. abundant cobbles to 10 in. diameter. CL @ 14.0 ft. SANDY CLAY, fine grained, olive brown, grayish brown, and brown, hard; manganese and iron oxide development; occasional thin interbedded sandstone lenses. TOTAL DEPTH 16.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING Plate B-2 September 26, 2014 Page 3 P/W 1404-05 Report No. 1404-05-B-2 Test Pit No. Depth (ft.) USCS Description TP-3 0.0 – 1.0 SC Topsoil: CLAYEY SAND with silt, fine to medium grained, grayish brown, dry, loose. 1.0 – 12.0 CL SP Older Alluvium (Qoal): SILTY CLAY, dark brown, slightly moist, firm; abundant white carbonate development, root hairs, porous. @ 3.0 ft. SAND, fine grained, brown, slightly moist, medium dense; abundant carbonate development, root hairs. CL SC @ 7.0 ft. SANDY CLAY, fine to coarse grained, brown, slightly moist, stiff; carbonate development. @9.0 ft. Cobble lense with sandy clay matrix, dense; cobbles up to 8 inch diameter. @10.0 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine to medium grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense; occasional cobbles. TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TP-4 0.0 – 1.5 SC Topsoil: CLAYEY SAND with silt, fine to medium grained, grayish brown, dry, loose; slight white carbonate development; occasional cobbles to 6 in. diameter. 1.5 – 13.0 CL Older Alluvium (Qoal): SANDY CLAY, fine grained, reddish brown, stiff, slightly moist. SC SP SC @ 6.5 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine to coarse grained, reddish brown, slightly moist, medium dense to dense; manganese and iron oxide development, occasional gravel and cobbles to 8 in. diameter @10.0 ft. POORLY GRADED SAND, fine to medium grained, light gray, slightly moist, medium dense. @11.5 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine to coarse grained, reddish brown, slightly moist, medium dense to dense; occasional gravel and cobbles. TOTAL DEPTH 13.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING Plate B-3 September 26, 2014 Page 4 P/W 1404-05 Report No. 1404-05-B-2 Test Pit No. Depth (ft.) USCS Description TP-5 0.0 – 1.0 SM Topsoil: SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, brown, dry, loose; abundant subrounded gravel; occasional cobbles. 1.0 – 20.0 SC SW Older Alluvium (Qoal): CLAYEY SAND, fine to coarse grained, red, slightly moist, medium dense to dense; abundant subrounded gravel. @3.0 ft. abundant subangular to subrounded cobble and occasional boulder. @8.5 ft. WELL GRADED SAND, fine to coarse grained, reddish brown, slightly moist, dense; abundant subangular to subrounded cobbles to 6 in. diameter; about 60% sand, 40% cobble. @18.0 ft. becomes sandier; about 75 sand, 25% cobble. TOTAL DEPTH 20.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TP-6 0.0 – 1.0 SC Topsoil: CLAYEY SAND with silt, fine to medium grained, brown, dry, loose; abundant subrounded gravel; occasional cobbles to 6 in. diameter. 1.0 – 9.0 CL Older Alluvium (Qoal): SANDY CLAY, fine to coarse grained with subangular gravel and occasional small cobble, dark brown, slightly moist, firm; root hairs. SC @ 2.5 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine to coarse grained, red to reddish brown, slightly moist, medium dense; abundant carbonate and iron oxide development; occasional subangular to subrounded cobble to 8 in. diameter. @5 ft. becomes dense. TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING Plate B-4 September 26, 2014 Page 5 P/W 1404-05 Report No. 1404-05-B-2 Test Pit No. Depth (ft.) USCS Description TP-7 0.0 – 0.5 SC Topsoil: CLAYEY SAND with silt, fine to medium grained, brown, dry, loose; occasional gravel to small cobble. 0.5 – 12.0 CL Older Alluvium (Qoal): SANDY CLAY, fine to coarse grained, dark brown, slightly moist, firm; occasional gravel to small cobble. SC CLAYEY SAND, fine to coarse grained, red to reddish brown, slightly moist, medium dense; moderate carbonate development to 7.0 ft. bgs., abundant gravel and cobbles to 8 in. diameter; about 30% cobble. @10 ft. becomes dense; tighter digging. TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING Plate B-5 Plate B-6 Plate B-7 Plate B-8 Plate B-9 Plate B-10 Plate B-11 Plate B-12 Plate B-13 Plate B-14 ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. APPENDIX C LABORATORY DATA Plate C-1 Plate C-2 Plate C-3 Plate C-4 Plate C-5 Plate C-6 Plate C-7 APPENDIX D APPENDIX D SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION FOR NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. G2755-42-01 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 D- 1 - September 14, 2021 APPENDIX D SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION General Slope stability analyses were performed on Cross-Sections A-A', B-B' C-C', E-E', F-F', and G-G' shown on Figures 1 and 2. The slope stability analyzes utilized the information on the preliminary grading study plans provided by PLSA with respect to proposed site conditions. Slope stability was evaluated for the MSE walls constructed along the south property margin and the natural hillside descending slope along the eastern property margin. Stability analysis for the soil nail wall along the northern property margin should be performed once preliminary wall design is performed and coordination with the wall designer occurs. Slope geometry, geologic structure, and calculated factors of safety for each cross section analyzed are presented on the figures in this Appendix. Additional analysis will be needed once preliminary wall designs are complete. The computer program, Slope/W from GeoSlope 2018, distributed by Geo-Slope International, was utilized to perform slope stability analyses. This program uses conventional slope stability equations and a two-dimensional limit-equilibrium method to calculate the factor of safety against deep-seated failure. For our analyses, Spencer’s Method with block failure mode within the claystone beds was used. Spencer’s Method satisfies both moment and force equilibrium. Circular failure method was also utilized at some of the cross section locations. The computer program searches for the most critical failure surface based on geometry and soil strength parameters. The computer program searches for the critical failure surface based on parameters inputted, including the location of the “left” and “right” sliding blocks and the failure plane entrance and exit locations. The critical failure surface for each analysis is shown on computer generated output directly above the failure surface (which is shown as the hatched area on the figure). Shear Strength Parameters Shear strength parameters used in the analyses are based on laboratory direct shear testing performed for our investigation, investigations and grading for the adjacent Otay Ranch Village 3 project, and our experience with similar soil conditions. Table D-1 summarizes the shear strength tests performed by Geocon Incorporated during this geotechnical investigation. Table D-2 summarize residual and fully softened values for the bentonitic claystone bed. The residual and fully softened shear strength values were determined following the procedure presented in Stark, Choi, McCone (2005) and GeoInstitute (2016). Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 D- 2 - September 14, 2021 Shear strength values used in our analyses are shown on Table D-3. The shear strength values are also shown on stability output figures. TABLE D-1 SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Soil/Geologic Unit Sample No. Angle of Shear Resistance (degrees) Unit Cohesion (psf) Terrace Deposits LB1-3 30 (peak) 35 (ultimate) 790 (peak) 350 (ultimate) LB3-1* 20 (peak) 20 (ultimate) 550 (peak) 540 (ultimate) LB4-1* 33 (peak) (32 ultimate) 590 (peak) 480 (ultimate) Otay Formation LB4-2 (Claystone Bed) 36 (peak) 30 (ultimate) 670 (peak) 200 (ultimate) LB5-3 (Siltstone) 35 (peak) 34 (ultimate) 530 (peak) 300 (ultimate) LB5-5 (Claystone Bed) 34 (peak) 34 (ultimate) 270 (peak) 22 (ultimate) *Sample remolded to approximately 90 percent of maximum dry density near optimum moisture content. TABLE D-2 RESIDUAL AND FULLY SOFTENED SHEAR STRENGTH VALUES FOR CLAYSTONE BED BASED ON STARK, CHOI, MCCONE (2005) Sample No. Liquid Limit Percent Clay Residual Values Fully Softened Values Angle of Internal Friction (degrees) Cohesion (psf) Angle of Internal Friction (degrees) Cohesion (psf) LB2-3 57 32 14 50 24 60 LB5-1 56 29 15 55 25 60 TABLE D-3 SHEAR STRENGTH USED IN SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES Soil Type Angle of Internal Friction (degrees) Cohesion (psf) Qcf (Compacted Fill) 28 250 Qt (Terrace Deposits) 35 350 To (Otay Formation) 34 300 To (Claystone Bed) 18 50 Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 D- 3 - September 14, 2021 With respect to the claystone bed shear strength, we utilized a value that corresponds to a mid-range value between residual and fully softened values determined using the Stark, Choi, McCone (2005) and GeoInstitute (2016) procedures. In our opinion this value is conservative as no shearing or remolding was observed in the claystone bed. Slope Stability — Bentonitic Claystone Beds Stability analysis were performed to evaluate the impacts the observed bentonitic claystone beds have on slope stability. The following two conditions were analyzed: 1) MSE Wall along the south side of the property with the backcut for the reinforcing grid equal to the height of the retaining wall; and 2) the bentonitic claystone exposed near the toe of the natural hillside slope on the east side of the property. We have also assumed that perched groundwater is present on the lower claystone bed. For condition number one, we have assumed the backcut for the MSE retaining wall along the south side of the property will remove the claystone bed to a horizontal distance (measured from the back of the wall) equal to the height of the retaining wall. If the claystone bed is removed to this horizontal limit, the proposed retaining wall and backfill will create a stabilizing buttress that provides a factor of safety greater than 1.5. Cross Sections A-A', B-B', and C-C' show the slope stability analysis after construction of the proposed MSE wall. The wall backcut has been assumed to extend up from the excavation bottom at a 1:1 plane to the proposed finish grade surface. If the final wall design has shorter wall grids and/or backcut dimensions, additional analysis should be performed to evaluate if the proposed condition will have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 after construction of the wall. As shown on Figure 2 and the stability figures in this Appendix, the buttress should start in front of the wall and down to a depth of at least 5 feet below the claystone bed and sloped back into the slope as shown on Figure 3. Buttress drains as shown on Figure 3 should be installed and outlet to the storm drain system or in front of the retaining wall. For condition number two, Cross Sections E-E', F-F', and G-G' have been drawn through the eastern facing hillside slope. At Cross Section G-G', the proposed MSE retaining wall is located approximately mid-height of the slope. As such, the wall backcut will not extend deep enough to intercept the lower claystone bed. Based on our analysis, a buttress will be needed to provide a factor of safety of at least 1.5. The buttress should start near the toe of the hillside slope and extend back into the slope a distance of at least 50 feet measured from the toe of the slope. The buttress backcut should extend up at a 1:1 plane to proposed pad grade. The approximate buttress/clay bed front removal limit is shown on Figure 2. The upper clay near the top of the slope will require a stability fill. The clay bed should be removed to a horizontal distance of at least 15 feet back into the slope as shown on Cross Sections E-E' and F-F'. Geocon Project No. G2755-42-01 D- 4 - September 14, 2021 The stability fill should include a back drain that outlets to the slope face. Subdrain cut off and head walls as shown in Section 7.7 of this report should be constructed. An outlet should be provided every approximately 100 feet of the stability fill. Stability analysis for the soil nail wall along the northern property margin can be performed once preliminary wall design is performed and coordination with the wall designer occurs. Our analyses assumes select material derived from excavations in the Terrace Deposits or sandstone portions of the Otay Formation will be used for the buttress fill. Minimum shear strength parameters to produce a factor of safety in excess of 1.5 are 28 degree friction angle and 250 psf cohesion. Summary of Stability Analyses Table D-4 summarizes the stability analyses performed for this study. The calculated factor-of-safety for proposed slopes and recommended stabilization method is included on the table. Analyses for the soil nail wall will need to be performed once preliminary design of the wall is complete. TABLE D-4 SUMMARY OF STABILITY ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDED STABILIZATION METHOD Cross Section Location Proposed Graded Factor-of-Safety Stabilization Method A-A', B-B', and C-C' Southern Slope with MSE Wall Construction 1.7 to 2.1 Claystone bed removed during wall backcut excavation E-E' and F-F' Eastern Slope 1.5 to 2.0 15 foot-wide stability fill G-G' Southeast Slope Area 1.5 to 1.6 50 foot wide buttress at toe of slope 1.90 Distance (Feet) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 50 100 150 200 250 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 50 100 150 200 250 PL Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 325 33 1 To 130 325 33 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: A-A (Proposed) Fully Softened with Groundwater.gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION A-A' PL 1.73 Distance (Feet) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 50 100 150 200 250 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 50 100 150 200 250 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 325 33 1 To 130 325 33 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: B-B (Proposed) Fully Softened with Groundwater.gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION B-B' PL PL 2.07 Distance (Feet) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 50 100 150 200 250 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 50 100 150 200 250 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 325 33 1 To 130 325 33 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: C-C (Proposed) Fully Softened with Groundwater.gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION C-C' PL PL 1.51 Distance, Feet 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 225 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) M S L 100 125 150 175 200 225 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qt 130 350 35 1 To 130 300 34 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: E-E (Proposed) Circular - Fully Softened (Groundwater).gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION E-E' 1.54 Distance (Feet) 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 350 35 1 To 130 300 34 1 To (2) 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: E-E (Proposed) Fully Softened - Upper Clay Removed with Groundwater.gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION E-E' 1.5 Distance, Feet 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 El e v a t i o n , F e e t M S L 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n , F e e t M S L 100 125 150 175 200 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 350 35 1 To 130 300 34 1 To (2) 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: E-E (Upper Clay Bed) Fully Softened - Circular.gsz Date: 09/13/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION E-E' 1.5 Distance (Feet) 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 350 35 1 To 130 300 34 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: E-E (Proposed) Fully Softened with Ground Water-Upper Clay Removed.gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION E-E' 2.03 Distance (Feet) 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 225 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 225 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 Qcf 130 250 28 Qt 130 350 35 To 130 300 34 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: F-F (Proposed) Fully Softened - Stability Fill, Circular.gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION F-F' 1.5 Distance (Feet) 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 350 35 1 To 130 300 34 1 To (2) 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: G-G (Proposed) Buttress ( Fully Softened with Groundwater).gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION G-G' 1.6 Distance (Feet) 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t ) 100 125 150 175 200 Color Name Unit Weight (pcf) Cohesion' (psf) Phi' (°) Piezometric Line Claystone Bed (CL/CH) 130 50 18 1 Qcf 130 250 28 1 Qt 130 350 35 1 To 130 300 34 1 NIRVANA Project No. G2755-42-01 File Name: G-G (Proposed) Buttress - Circular (Fully Softened with Groundwater).gsz Date: 09/14/2021 Directory: S:\Engineering and Geology\ENGINEER PROGRAMS, GUIDES, ETC\EngrgPrg\GEO-SLOPE2018\G2755-42-01\ CROSS SECTION G-G' APPENDIX E APPENDIX E RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR NIRVANA INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AND SELF STORAGE COMPLEX 821 MAIN STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. G2755-42-01 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. 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 sl opes 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. G2755-42-01 D- 6 - September 14, 2021 LIST OF REFERENCES 1.Advanced Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. (AGS), Update Geotechnical Report and Grading Plan Review, Energy Park, Chula Vista, California, dated September 29, 2014 (Report No. 1404-05-B-2); 2.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 August 29, 2021; 3.Geocon Incorporated, Final Report of Testing and Observation Services Performed During Site Grading, Otay Ranch Village 3, Chula Vista, California, dated November 25, 2020 (Project No. 06930-52-06); 4.Stark, Choi, McCone (2005), Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Drained Shear Strength Parameters for Analysis of Landslides. 5.Geo Institute (2016), Development and Use of Fully Softened Shear Strength in Slope Stability Analyses, Geo Institute, dated February 12, 2016. 6.Kennedy, M. P. and S. S Tan, Geologic Map of the San Diego 30’x60’ Quadrangle,, California, California Geologic Survey, 2008. 7.Magellan Architecture, Chula Vista Self Storage, Chula Vista, CA, Scheme B, dated May 12, 2021; 8.Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, Preliminary Grading Study, Nirvana Self Storage, 821 Main Street, Chula Vista, CA, dated July 23, 2021. 9.SEAOC (2019), OSHPD Seismic Design Maps: Structural Engineers Association of California website, http://seismicmaps.org/, accessed August 29, 2021; 10.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 August 29, 2021; 11.Unpublished reports and maps on file with Geocon Incorporated.