Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 10-10; Carlsbad Kingdom Hall; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (9)Prrparrd for: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad. CA 92008 0 0 Hydrology and Hydraulics Report NORTHWEST QUADRANT DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS GRAND AVENUE • 30°/o SUBMITTAL-March 8, 2013 Prepared by: RBF Consulting Richard Lucera, PE, CFM, CPESC-RCE 58089 Scott Cartwright, PE 9755 Clairemont Mesa Blvd .. San Diego, CA 92124 858.614.5000 Telephone I 858.614.5001 Fax fi}Jf JN li-W5FO.OOJ 0 .. 0 0 Table of Contents 1. Project Description .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Background ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 Project Location .................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................. 1 1.4 Proposed Improvements ..................................................................................... 1 1.5 FEMA Firm Map .................................................................................................. 1 2. Study Objectives ....................................................................................................... 3 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 4 3.2 Hydraulics ........................................................................................................... 5 3.2.1 Street Capacity ............................................................................................ 5 3.2.2 Storm Drain Pipe Sizing .............................................................................. 5 3.2.3 Storm Drain Inlet Sizing ............................................................................... 5 3.2.4 Limiting Hydraulic Capacity and Impacts to Hydrology ............................... 5 3.3 Water Quality Retrofit ......................................................................................... 6 3.3.1 Water Quality Sizing .................................................................................... 6 3.3.2 Retrofit Feasibility ........................................................................................ 6 4. Results ...................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 8 4.2 Hydraulics ........................................................................................................... 8 5. Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................... 9 6. References .............................................................................................................. 11 List of Tables Table 4-1 Rational Method Hydrology Summary .............................................................. 8 Table 4-2 Street Capacity Summary Grand Avenue ......................................................... 8 Table 4-3 Summary of Required Treatment Volume and Surface Area ........................... 8 List of Figures Figure 1-1 Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................... 2 Appendix APPENDIX A-NRCS Soils Information and FEMA Maps APPENDIX B -Existing Condition Hydrology Map APPENDIX C-Existing Condition Hydrology, Inlet, and Pipe Capacity Calculations APPENDIX D-Existing Condition Street Capacity Calculations APPENDIX E -Proposed Condition Hydrology, Inlet, and Pipe Capacity Calculations APPENDIX F -Hydraf/ow Hydrographs APPENDIX G -Preliminary Pipe Improvement Alignment Grand Avenue I 1 . Project Description 1 . 1 Project Background Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain This project represents a portion of the overall plan for drainage improvements in Carlsbad's Northwest Quadrant. Specifically, this repot1 addresses the historically observed flooding conditions along Grand A venue between the State Street alley and Jefferson Street. The project's overall goal is to alleviate, to the greatest extent practical, current deficiencies in drainage and resulting inundation. RBF has been hired by the City to identify the source of these deficiencies and work with staff to develop and implement design solutions. 1.2 Project Location The approximate location that is being addressed in this phase of work can be seen on the Vicinity Map (Figure 1-1 ): • Grand Avenue Sever ponding and inadequate drainage has been observed along Grand A venue, particularly in front of the Chase bank located at the southwest corner of Grand A venue and Madison Street. 1.3 Existing Conditions The existing drainage areas are described as follows and can be seen on the map included in APPENDIX B: • Grand A venue There is an existing pipe system in Grand Avenue that starts approximately 150' east of the intersection with Madison Street and connects to the twin 48" pipes at the State Street alley. This existing system in Grand A venue is believed to be dramatically undersized, which not only impacts the drainage in Grand Avenue, but also the ability of the existing systems in Madison Street and Roosevelt Street (that connect directly into the Grand A venue system) to function properly. 1.4 Proposed Improvements The intent of this project is to replace the existing storm drain system in Grand Avenue, as well as any undersized laterals that were not addressed as part of recent improvements in Madison and Roosevelt. Undersized inlets will also be replaced (and perhaps some added) in order to capture a greater percentage of current flow and reduce flooding in the area. Wherever practical, the drainage system will be improved to meet applicable City of Carlsbad engineering criteria for pipes, inlets, and maximum gutter flow. 1.5 FEMA Firm Map • FEMA has mapped the project sites and surrounding areas as Unshaded "Zone X" (i.e. outside the 500 year floodplain). Refer to APPENDIX A 1 I tlAOlllll 2YIA.JIIf 3Y}A-4 YIAIJUI 8 IIA!IIIIMI f fiA\If.¥ lfti CIIIIO. I YIAOOISl tnii.MDM' If fill~ U Cl.fWIODI tl fiACIJJU 02006 Thomas Bros. Maps Sf ATE Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain Figure 1-1 Vicinity Map 2 • 2. Study Objectives Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain The objectives for this study include the following: • Perform a detailed hydrologic analysis to determine the flow rate into the existing 18" storm drain in Grand Avenue during the 1 00 year, 10 year, and 2 year events. • Determine the approximate flow rate into the existing twin 48" and 66" pipes in State Street Alley during the 1 00 year event. • Assess the factors (aside from hydrology) influencing inundation in Grand Avenue at the Chase Bank location within the context of historical observation during the flood event of October 2012. This assessment will consider: o Gutter capacity in Grand Avenue near Chase Bank o Storage within the topographic sump located at the southwest curb return at the intersection of Grand Avenue at Madison Street. o Limitation in inlet and pipe capacity at Grand Avenue and Madison Street. • Determine the hydraulic adequacy of the twin 48" and 66" pipes in State Street Alley and confirm that its capacity does not cause or contribute to observed flooding at the Chase Bank location on Grand Avenue. • Serve as a technical basis of design for final improvement plans, including sizing the proposed pipe in Grand Avenue as well as inlet modification/addition at the intersection with Madison Street. • Determine feasibility of LID Retrofit opportunities within the project area. The feasibility analysis will focus on the potential to retrofit bioretention planters within the public right of way. 3 3. Methodology 3. 1 Hydrology Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain Existing hydrologic parameters have been developed using the Rational Method procedures according to 2003 County of San Diego Hydrology Manual (SDCHM), as adapted within Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards. Calculations have been performed utilizing these parameters within the Hydraflow Storm Sewers computer program. Runoff Coefficient (C) • C values were determined from Table 3-1 in the SDHM, in conjunction with impervious area estimates from public domain aerial photographs. A summary of these values can be found within Table 4-1. • Soils information has been taken from the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) web soil survey. Refer to the soils map and NRCS descriptions in APPENDIX A. Intensity (I) • Precipitation values come from the Rainfall lsopluvial map in Appendix B of the SDCHM (100-yr P6=2.6 in, 10-yr Pa=1.7 in, 2-yr Pa=1.2 in). • The initial time of concentration (Ti) is based on Table 3-2 in the SDHM. Travel time (Tt) is then added based on the velocity and distance of flow in the gutter to determine the total time of concentration (Tc). Area (A) • Drainage areas (A) were determined based on available topographic information. Site inspections were conducted to verify the potential presence of physical drainage features capable of impacting flow paths, but too insignificant to be identified as part of an area-wide aerial topographic survey. Drainage area delineations can be found in APPENDIX B. One other factor that can have an impact on the peak runoff rates in the existing condition is the topographic sump in Madison Street near the intersection with Grand Avenue. In a large or intense storm event, the capacity of the existing pipes and inlet at cross gutter can be exceeded, causing runoff to pond within the topographic sump until it reaches an elevation at which it can be conveyed around the Chase Bank building. As runoff ponds in the area, it will inundate a significant portion of Madison Street as well as the bank parking lot. The ponded water will ultimately release either through the parking lot or around the north side of the bank into Grand Avenue. Additional survey shots are needed within the parking lot to determine the exact release elevation. Based on the current information there could be as much as 8" - 1 0" of pending above the elevation of the inlet rim. This would equate to roughly 4" lower than the existing finished floor of Chase Bank. 4 • • 3.2 Hydraulics 3.2.1 Street Capacity Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain The City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards require that an inlet to an underground storm system be provided when enough flow has accumulated within the gutter to cause the depth to approach or exceed the top of curb elevation during the 100 year, 6 hour event. Street capacity was analyzed at various cross sections for the existing conditions at each site using Flowmaster software, which determines flow depth based upon Manning's equation for uniform channel conditions. Street capacity calculations for each site can be found within APPENDIX D and are summarized in Table 4-2 Street Capacity Summary Grand Avenue. The calculations were performed for the 100 year event, as well as the 1 0 year and 2 year. 3.2.2 Storm Drain Pipe Sizing The City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards require that public drainage facilities contain the 10 year, 6 hour event "underground". Pipe hydraulics are calculated using the computer software Hydraflow Storm Sewers. Input parameters include length of pipe, slope, and invert elevations. Hydraflow Storm Sewers was used to analyze the hydraulic performance of the proposed storm drain pipes. The software uses design flows generated from the site hydrology to calculate hydraulic grade line and flow velocity. The software computes pipe hydraulics using the widely accepted "Standard Step" method, in which iterative calculations are performed to achieve an overall system energy balance, as described in Bernoulli's Principal. Head loss, friction loss, and junction loss are all accounted for when determining the hydraulic grade line. The starting tailwater elevation is assumed to be the top of the existing dual 48" pipes to which the proposed system will connect. The existing dual 48" pipes are assumed to be flowing full during the peak of the proposed Grand Avenue system since the timing of the peaks for both systems is essentially coincidental. The similarity in timing is due to the fact that both watersheds are similar in both size and shape. It should be noted that the timing of the peaks will be similar to one another regardless of the assumed storm distribution (i.e. SCS Type I, County of San Diego "nested" distribution, etc.). 3.2.3 Storm Drain Inlet Sizing Proposed inlets are sized to capture the 10 year, 6 hour event (at a minimum) without bypass, and also capture enough during the 100 year event to maintain a depth of flow in the street that is below the top of curb. Inlet performance is calculated in Hydraflow Storm Sewers. 3.2.4 Limiting Hydraulic Capacity and Impacts to Hydrology In the existing condition, the undersized pipes and inlets cause runoff to pond at several locations (particularly near the intersection of Madison Street and Grand Avenue as discussed in Section 3.1). There are also several inlets that have significant bypass in the existing condition. 5 3.3 Water Quality Retrofit Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain Although this project is not considered "redevelopment" based on the definition in the City SUSMP and therefore is not subject to SUSMP requirements, this report will discuss typical SUSMP requirements for BMP sizing as a basis of comparison. This comparison will assist in deciding if adding BMP retrofitting to the scope of this project is in the best interest of the City. 3.3.1 Water Quality Sizing Based on the SUSMP, volume based BMPs (such as bioretention) should be design to treat the volume of runoff produced by the 24-hour 851h percentile event. For this project, that equates to 0.6". Based on the total project tributary drainage area (25.5 acres) and an average runoff coefficient of 0.84, the total volume of runoff produced by the 0.6" rain event would be 46,650 fe (or 1.07 ac-ft). The SUSMP also requires a minimum surface area ratio of 4% as a means to prevent excessively deep facilities which may provide the necessary volume, but are prone to clogging or vector issues. 3.3.2 Retrofit Feasibility As stated in Section 2, one of the objectives of this study is to determine the feasibility of LID retrofit within the existing planter areas along Grand Avenue. The following driving factors for retrofit were considered: 1. Mandated retrofit assumed to be required as part of the upcoming revision to the Regional Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. The MS4 Permit could be adopted as early as April 2013. 2. Potential outside funding sources and grant programs 3. Possible pipe size reduction 4. Improved water quality MS4 Permit The draft version of the updated MS4 Permit requires that each jurisdiction identify and encourage potential retrofit projects. Although it is not known exactly how this requirement will be enforced, adding bioretention to the scope of this project would certainly contribute toward satisfying the requirements of the Permit. Although this would only represent a portion of what the City will ultimately need, even small projects such as this should be seriously considered. The BMP retrofit could potentially be used to offset other projects where BMPs are not feasible (such as adding a turn lane to an existing street). Outside Funding Sources Adding BMP retrofits to the scope of the project may open up additional federal and state funding sources that are set aside for such activities. Although they are not currently accepting applications, grant programs through measures such as Prop 50 and Prop 84 have historically provided assistance. Many of these programs require a portion of the grant to be matched by the City. Some also require monitoring and reporting plans as well as public education and outreach components. Grant loans such as the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF), which is currently accepting applications, may also be available. 6 • Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain Pipe Size Reduction One potential benefit to LID retrofit would be a reduction in the necessary size of pipe in Grand Avenue. Hydraflow Hydrographs was used to assess the impacts of the potential storage and detention within the existing planter areas (see APPENDIX A). This was done my modeling two different scenarios: (1) bioretention equal to what would be required in the SUSMP and (2) bioretention equal to % of what would be required in the SUSMP. Both scenarios would allow for a reduction in proposed pipe size (compared to an unmitigated condition) from 48" to 36". Reducing the pipe size is really only a benefit to the City if the cost savings are greater than the cost to implement the BMP retrofit. The following is rough estimate of the costs and savings associated with the BMP Retrofit based on the two scenarios described above: Scenario 1-SUSMP Cost-$1,700,000-1.3 acres of bioretention at $30/sf Savings -$42,900-Storm drain downsized from 48" to 36" for 1,100 feet Scenario 2-% SUSMP Cost-$850,000-0.65 acres of bioretention at $30/sf Savings -$42,900-Storm drain downsized from 48" to 36" for 1,100 feet There is clearly no direct cost saving from using BMP retrofit to reduce the size of the proposed storm drain. It should also be noted that there are realistically very few areas within the project limits that would be well suited for bioretention. The best locations are as follows (the 650 square feet from these 5 areas does not come anywhere close to the 0.65 acres in Scenario 2, and would therefore not even allow for a reduction in pipe size}: 2 planters at the southeast corner of Grand Avenue and Madison Street (approximately 250 square feet of area) 2 planters at the southwest corner of Grand Avenue and Madison Street (approximately 250 square feet of area) 1 planter at the southeast corner of Grand Avenue and Roosevelt Street (approximately 150 square feet of area) Although the potential savings to not exceed the additional costs in Scenario 1 or 2, the cost to construct the 650 square feet of bioretention would be estimated to be only $19,500. Water Quality Adding bioretention within the existing planters will improve the quality of the stormwater runoff in the area. Based on the water quality volume calculations discussed above, available area is not even close to what would typically be required to demonstrate compliance with traditional water quality requirements (see Table 4-3). Although the BMPs would improve the quality of stormwater runoff at some theoretic level, the extent would be imperceptible through any means of analytic monitoring (either at the outlet of the MS4 or within Buena Vista Lagoon, the nearest receiving water body). 7 4. Results 4.1 Hydrology Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain The results of the hydrologic analysis are summarized in Table 4-1. These flow rates represent the peak flow rate to each inlet modeled in the system. Once flow enters the system, it is routed and combined using Hydraflow Storm Sewers. Table 4-1 Rational Method Hydrology Summary 2Year 10 Year 100 Year Area Tc Q2 01o Basin 10 (ac) c (min) Pe I (inlhr} (cfs) Pe I (inlhr) (cfs) Pe I (inlhr) 1 2.5 0.84 7.0 1.2 2.54 5.3 1.7 3.59 7.6 2.6 5.50 2 2.8 0.84 7.2 1.2 2.51 5.9 1.7 3.55 8.3 2.6 5.43 3 0.9 0.90 5.0 1.2 3.18 2.6 1.7 4.50 3.6 2.6 6.88 4 1.9 0.84 7.0 1.2 2.54 4.1 1.7 3.59 5.8 2.6 5.50 5 0.9 0.84 5.0 1.2 3.15 2.4 1.7 4.46 3.4 2.6 6.82 6 0.2 0.90 5.0 1.2 3.16 0.6 1.7 4.48 0.8 2.6 6.85 7 1.2 0.84 6.3 1.2 2.71 2.8 1.7 3.85 3.9 2.6 5.88 8 15.1 0.84 10.6 1.2 1.95 24.7 1.7 2.76 35.0 2.6 4.23 Where: Area: Tributary drainage area in acres C: Runoff coefficient Tc: Total time of concentration in minutes 4.2 Hydraulics Ps: 6-hour rainfall depth 1: Rainfall intensity in inches per hour Q: Flow rate in cubic feet per second Table 4-2 provides a summary of the hydraulic adequacy of Grand Avenue as several different locations. The locations can be seen on the Street Capacity Location Map in Appendix D. A "Yes" is indicated when the depth of flow in the street is less and or equal to the top of curb (in other words meeting City of Carlsbad Standards). A "No" means that the flow is above the top of curb. Table 4-2 StreetCapacity Summary Grand Avenue Section Location 100-Year Event 10-Year Event 2-Year Event 1-1 Jefferson -Madison No No No 1-2 Madison -Roosevelt Yes Yes Yes 1-3 Roosevelt -State No Yes Yes 1-4 State-Alley No No No Table 4-3 Summary of Required Treatment Volume and Surface Area Project SUSMP Required Availab~~ SUSMP Required Available Area Area (ac) Storage Volume (ft1 Volume Surface Area (tr) (tr) 25.5 46,650 650 44,430 650 8 0100 (cfs) 11.6 12.7 5.5 8.8 5.2 1.2 5.9 53.6 Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain 5. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the size and configuration of the tributary area to the twin 48" and 66" pipes, the total peak flow rate is estimated to be approximately 200 cfs in the 1 CO- year event. Based on Manning's equation, this equates to a full flow condition in that portion of the system. As discussed in Section 3.1, there are several factors that influence the current inundation near the Chase Bank at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Madison Street. Our analysis concludes that local storm drain improvements can significantly reduce (if not completely eliminate) the ponding in this area (and others nearby within Grand Avenue) for events up to the 100-year. The calculations show that ponding in that area in the proposed condition will not exceed the top of the curb. Specifically, we recommend: • The 15"-18" existing system in Grand Avenue should be replaced with a 48" system. • The most immediately contributing laterals in Madison Street should be upsized from 18" to 24". • Several inlets will be reconstructed with larger openings. o Inlet at 507 Grand Avenue -Upsize from 5' to 15' o Inlet on Madison at Cross Gutter-Upsize from 9' to 18' o Inlet at 2907 State Street-Upsize from 6' to 9' • A new inlet (or possibly two inlets) will be added upstream of the existing inlet in Grand Avenue, east of Madison Street. As discussed in Section 3.3.2, four driving factors were considered for BMP retrofit. The conclusions and recommendations are as follows: • MS4 Permit -This would represent small, but important part of the City's overall BMP retrofit plan, anticipated as a pending requirement by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. This would show the Regional Board as well as other Non-Government Organizations ("NGOs" such as Coastkeeper, etc.) that the City is making a good faith effort to comply with that portion of the new MS4 Permit. • Outside Funding -Since most of the major grant programs are not currently accepting applications, this is not a critical factor, unless the City would like to pursue the SRF loan option. • Reduction in Pipe Size -The calculations clearly show that BMPs (of any reasonably achievable extent) in the available areas will not result in a reduced pipe size for the proposed system in Grand Avenue. • Water Quality Improvement-Although adding BMPs would certainly improve the quality of the storm water to some theoretical degree, it would most likely not be at a physical or environmentally perceptible level. The achievable area and volume for bioretention is substantially less than what would be considered to provide adequate water quality treatment as described in the City SUSMP. 9 Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain The City should consider all of these factors while making their decision regarding BMP retrofit. Although there are limited options for outside funding, the size of the pipe in Grand Avenue is not likely to be reduced, and the direct impact to water quality would be difficult to measure, there are still some advantages to including BMP retrofit with this project. It will count toward satisfying the requirement in the MS4 Permit, and based on the area available would not add a significant amount to the total project construction cost. 10 6. References Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Improvements Hydrology and Hydraulics Study Grand Avenue Storm Drain San Diego County Department of Public Works Flood Control Section, Hydrology Manual (SDCHM), June 2003. San Diego County, Drainage Design Manual (SDCDDM), July 2005. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Soil Survey San Diego Area, California. December 1973. City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards, Volume 1, Chapter 5, 2008. 11 APPENDIX A -NRCS Soils Information and FEMA Maps 33' 9' 57" 33' 9' 30" Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California Map Scale: 1:5,890 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet N A .!--~==.-----~:=:===::=~Meters 0 50 100 200 300 ~----====::::~~---------=========Feet 0 300 600 1,200 1,800 ~ Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/6/2013 Page 1 of 3 33' 9' 5T' 33' 9' 30" USDA iilii Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) 0 Area of Interest (AOI} Soils D Soil Map Units Soil Ratings D A D AID DB D BID D c D C/D D D Not rated or not available Political Features Cities Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation +++ Rails ,...,. Interstate Highways /V' US Routes Major Roads ~ LocaiRoads Natural Resources Conservation Service MAP INFORMATION Map Scale: 1:5,880 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11 ") sheet. The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24.000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 11 N NAD83 This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: San Diego County Area, California Version 6, Dec 17, 2007 Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 6/7/2005 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/6/2013 Page 2 of 3 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soli Group-Summary by Map Unit-San Diego County Area, California (CA638) Map unit symbol I Map unit name I Rating I Acres In AOI I Percent of AOI MIC Marina loamy coarse sand, 2 B to 9 percent slopes 32.8 Totals for Area of Interest 32.8 Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (AID, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, BID, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 100.0% 100.0%' 3/6/2013 Page3 of3 MAP SCALE 1" = 500' ~~=io======~~====~~E::=:=7~so=====1~.ooo F FEET ~[p~~ PANEL 0761G ~ FIRM ~ FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP ® SAN DIEGO COUNTY, © @g CALIFORNIA @b AND INCORPORATED AREAS !!illl © PANEL 761 OF 2375 I (SEE MAP INDEX FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUn ~ ~ PHID ~ ~ CARt.SaAO CITY OF <10028> 0761 G @ <laAI<SIOECI1YOf' -0761 G ~ = @ © © d Nooat to IJHr Tn. Map NumbM _..,., befow llhOub bl!: lS!Id l1!b when ~ tNIP oratrt.. tN Cl;lmmuntty Nucnblt ~ abcwt t.hOl.lklt»UMCJon~agplJc.aDorat~tne~ _., d MAP NUMBER ~ 06073C0761G © MAP REVISED = MAY 16,2012 I Federal Emergency ~ .. nAgemeot Agency APPENDIX 8 -Existing Condition Hydrology Map LEGEND: BASNID A 5 AREA IACRESl 0100 ICFSl - - -BASW LNIT il ~ r: I '00 50 0 100 200 300 I ~e-I I I SCALE: !"'"' 100' CARLSBAD NW QUADRANT DRAINAGE DESIGN ANALYSIS GRAND AVENUE APPENDIX C-Existing Condition Hydrology, Inlet, and Pipe Capacity Calculations Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2009 Plan 5 6 ~!fall el-;g • 2 3 • • • Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 100-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Date: 03-07-2013 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line 10 Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Ons Junction No. rate size shape length ELOn ELUp slope down up loss Junct line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Grand Ave at State Street 104.5 15 Cir 5.000 35.52 35.58 1.200 36.77* 49.90* nfa 329.33 i End Manhole 2 Grand Ave at State Street(2) 81.67 15 Cir 167.000 35.58 36.09 0.305 329.33* 596.56* 34.43 630.99 1 Curb-Horiz 3 Grand wfof Roosevelt 75.71 15 Cir 308.000 36.09 39.73 1.182 630.99* 1054.45* 59.17 1113.62 2 Manhole 4 Roosevelt sfof Grand 5.53 15 Cir 40.000 39.73 42.58 7.125 1113.62* 1113.91* 0.32 1114.23 3 Curb-Horiz 5 Grand efof Roosevelt 70.18 15 Cir 115.000 39.73 42.25 2.191 1113.62* 1249.50* 25.42 1274.92 3 Curb-Horiz 6 Grand along Chase Bank 65.87 15 Cir 235.000 42.25 43.47 0.519 1274.92* 1519.53* 26.43 1545.96 5 Manhole 7 Madison sfof Grand #1 56.00 18 Cir 37.000 44:05 44.35 0.811 1545.96* 1556.49* 20.30 1576.79 6 Curb-Horiz 8 Madison s/of Grand #2 1.23 18 Cir 38.000 44.35 46.00 4.342 1576.79* 1576.80* 0.01 1576.80 7 Curb-Horiz 9 Grand at Madison 9.87 18 Cir 33.000 43.47 43.72 0.758 1545.96* 1546.25* 0.07 1546.33 6 Manhole 10 Grand efof Madison 9.87 12 Cir 110.000 43.72 48.01 3.900 1546.33* 1554.78* 2.46 1557.24 9 Curb-Horiz 11 Madison s/of Grand #5 5.09 18 Cir 5.000 46.00 47.38 27.600 1576.79* 1576.80* 0.13 1576.93 7 Curb-Horiz 12 Grand Ave at APN 203-293-01 22.80 18 Cir 15.000 35.58 37.64 13.733 329.33* 330.04* 2.59 332.63 1 Curb-Horiz Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 100-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 J Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Return period= 100 Yrs. ; •surcharged (HGL above crown). ; i -Inlet control. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station Len DmgArea Rnoff AreaxC Tc Rain Total Cap Vel Pipe Invert Elev HGLEiev Gmd I Rim Elev Line 10 coeff (I) flow full Line To I ncr Total I ncr Total Inlet Syst Line Size Slope On Up On Up On Up (ft} (ac} (ac) (C) (min) (min) (inlhr) (cfs) (cfs) (ftls) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 5.000 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 21.49 0.0 11.1 4.1 104.5 7.07 85.14 15 1.20 35.52 35.58 36.77 49.90 41.00 40.96 Grand Ave at State 2 1 167.000 2.80 23.00 0.84 2.35 19.39 7.2 11.0 4.1 81.67 3.57 66.56 15 0.31 35.58 36.09 329.33 596.56 40.96 40.67 Grand Ave at State 3 2 308.000 0.00 20.20 0.00 0.00 17.03 0.0 11.0 4.1 75.71 7.02 61.70 15 1.18 36.09 39.73 630.99 1054.45 40.67 46.09 Grand wlaf Roosev 4 3 40.000 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 5.0 5.0 6.8 5.53 17.24 4.50 15 7.13 39.73 42.58 1113.62 1113.91 46.09 46.20 Roosevelt s/af Gra 5 3 115.00C 1.90 19.30 0.84 1.60 16.22 7.0 10.9 4.1 70.18 9.56 57.19 15 2.19 39.73 42.25 1113.62 1249.50 46.09 48.77 Grand e/af Rooset~ 6 5 235.00C 0.00 17.40 0.00 0.00 14.63 0.0 10.8 4.2 65.87 4.65 53.68 15 0.52 42.25 43.47 1274.92 1519.53 48.77 49.13 Grand along Chas 7 6 37.000 0.90 2.30 0.84 0.76 1.94 5.0 6.3 5.9 56.00 9.46 31.69 18 0.81 44.05 44.35 1545.96 1556.49 49.13 48.17 Madison s/of Gran 8 7 38.000 0.20 0.20 0.90 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 6.8 1.23 21.88 0.70 18 4.34 44.35 46.00 1576.79 1576.80 48.17 48.24 Madison slaf Gran 9 6 33.000 0.00 15.10 0.00 0.00 12.68 0.0 10.7 4.2 9.87 9.14 5.59 18 0.76 43.47 43.72 1545.96 1546.25 49.13 49.28 Grand at Madison 10 9 110.00C 15.10 15.10 0.84 12.68 12.68 10.6 10.6 4.2 9.87 7.03 12.57 12 3.90 43.72 48.01 1546.33 1554.78 49.28 50.11 Grand e/of Madiso 11 7 5.000 1.20 1.20 0.84 1.01 1.01 6.3 6.3 5.9 5.09 55.17 2.88 18 27.60 46.00 47.38 1576.79 1576.80 48.17 47.92 Madison s/af Gran 12 1 15.000 2.50 2.50 0.84 2.10 2.10 7.0 7.0 5.5 22.80 38.92 12.90 18 13.73 35.58 37.64 329.33 330.04 40.96 41.37 Grand Ave at APN Project File: Grand Ave Exstm I 100-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Intensity= 19.61 I (Inlet time+ 0.1 0) A 0.65; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; Total flows limited to inlet captured flows. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension \16.066 Inlet Report Page 1 Line lnletiD Q= Q Q Q June Curb Inlet Grate Inlet Gutter Inlet Byp No CIA carry capt byp type line Ht L area L w So w Sw Sx n Depth Spread Depth Spread Depr No (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in) (ft) (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (in) 1 New 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 2 Ex. Inlet 507 Grand 12.72 4.48 5.97 11.24 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.56 22.77 0.77 22.03 4.0 12 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 4 Ex. Inlet Roosevelt 5.53 0.00 5.53 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.56 22.92 0.79 22.92 4.0 Off 5 Ex. Inlet at 645 Gra 8.79 0.00 4.31 4.48 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.39 14.67 0.60 13.38 4.0 2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 7 Ex. Inlet Chase Ba 5.16 44.52 49.68 0.00 Curb 6.0 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 1.70 80.15 1.94 80.15 4.0 Off 8 Ex Inlet Chase Ban 1.23 0.00 1.23 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.005 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.25 7.38 0.41 3.98 4.0 7 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 10 Ex Inlet 725 Grand 53.55 0.00 9.87 43.68 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.69 29.47 0.91 28.93 4.0 7 11 5.94 0.00 5.09 0.84 Curb 6.0 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.35 12.52 0.55 10.93 4.0 7 12 Inlet at All America 11.56 11.24 22.80 0.00 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.90 40.18 1.14 40.18 4.0 Off Project File: Grand Ave Exstm I 1 00-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Inlet N-Values = 0.016; Intensity= 19.61/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period= 100 Yrs.; *Indicates KnCM'Tl Q added. All curb inlets are Horiz throat. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension '16.066 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 15 104.5 35.52 36.77 1.25 1.23 85.15 112.72 149.49 n/a 5.000 35.58 49.90 1.25** 1.23 85.13 112.68 162.58i n/a nta -99.58 0.54 n/a 2 15 81.67 35.58 329.33 1.25 1.23 66.56 68.89 398.22 160.03 167.00 36.09 596.56 1.25** 1.23 66.55 68.66 665.42 159.97 160.00 267.20 0.50 34.43 3 15 75.71 36.09 630.99 1.25 1.23 61.70 59.19 690.18 137.50 308.00 39.73 1054.45 1.25** 1.23 61.69 59.17 1113.62 137.45 137.48 423.44 1.00 59.17 4 15 5.53 39.73 1113.62 1.25 1.23 4.50 0.32 1113.94 0.733 40.000 42.58 1113.91 1.25 1.23 4.50 0.32 1114.23 0.733 0.733 0.293 1.00 0.32 5 15 70.18 39.73 1113.62 1.25 1.23 57.20 50.86 1164.48 118.16 115.00 42.25 1249.50 1.25** 1.23 57.19 50.84 1300.34 118.11 118.13 135.86 0.50 25.42 6 15 65.87 42.25 1274.92 1.25 1.23 53.69 44.81 1319.73 104.10 235.00 43.47 1519.53 1.25** 1.23 53.68 44.80 1564.33 104.06 104.08 244.59 0.59 26.43 7 18 56.00 44.05 1545.96 1.50 1.77 31.70 15.62 1561.58 28.451 37.000 44.35 1556.49 1.50** 1.77 31.69 15.61 1572.11 28.440 28.445 10.52 1.30 20.30 8 18 1.23 44.35 1576.79 1.50 1.77 0.70 0.01 1576.80 0.014 38.000 46.00 1576.80 1.50 1.77 0.70 0.01 1576.80 0.014 0.014 0.005 1.00 0.01 9 18 9.87 43.47 1545.96 1.50 1.77 5.59 0.49 1546.45 0.884 33.000 43.72 1546.25 1.50 1.77 5.59 0.49 1546.74 0.884 0.884 0.292 0.15 0.07 10 12 9.87 43.72 1546.33 1.00 0.79 12.57 2.46 1548.78 7.687 110.00 48.01 1554.78 1.oo•• 0.79 12.57 2.46 1557.24 7.684 7.685 8.454 1.00 2.46 11 18 5.09 46.00 1576.79 1.50 1.77 2.88 0.13 1576.92 0.235 5.000 47.38 1576.80 1.50 1.77 2.88 0.13 1576.93 0.235 0.235 0.012 1.00 0.13 12 18 22.80 35.58 329.33 1.50 1.77 12.91 2.59 331.92 4.716 15.000 37.64 330.04 1.50 1.77 12.90 2.59 332.63 4.715 4.716 0.707 1.00 2.59 Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 100-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 Notes: ; •• Critical depth. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension \16.066 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2009 Plan • 5 6 tfall ~:! • 2 3 • • • Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm 10-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Date: 03-07-2013 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on v6.066 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line LineiD Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns Junction No. rate size shape length ELDn ELUp slope down up loss Junct line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Grand Ave at State Street 68.31 15 Cir 5.000 35.52 35.58 1.200 36.77* 42.39* nla 161.54 i End Manhole 2 Grand Ave at State Street(2) 54.91 15 Cir 167.000 35.58 36.09 0.305 161.54* 282.34* 15.56 297.91 1 Curb-Horiz 3 Grand w/of Roosevelt 50.18 15 Cir 308.000 36.09 39.73 1.182 297.91* 483.92* 25.99 509.91 2 Manhole 4 Roosevelt s/of Grand 3.62 15 Cir 40.000 39.73 42.58 7.125 509.91* 510.03* 0.14 510.17 3 Curb-Horiz 5 Grand e/of Roosevelt 46.56 15 Cir 115.000 39.73 42.25 2.191 509.91* 569.71* 11.19 580.90 3 Curb-Horiz 6 Grand along Chase Bank 43.07 15 Cir 235.000 42.25 43.47 0.519 580.90* 685.46* 11.30 696.76 5 Manhole 7 Madison s/of Grand #1 34.93 18 Cir 37.000 44.05 44.35 0.811 696.76* 700.85* 7.90 708.75 6 Curb-Horiz 8 Madison s/of Grand #2 0.80 18 Cir 38.000 44.35 46.00 4.342 708.75* 708.75* 0.00 708.75 7 Curb-Horiz 9 Grand at Madison 8.14 18 Cir 33.000 43.47 43.72 0.758 696.76* 696.95* 0.05 697.00 6 Manhole 10 Grand e/of Madison 8.14 12 Cir 110.000 43.72 48.01 3.900 697.00* 702.75* 1.67 704.42 9 Curb-Horiz 11 Madison s/of Grand #5 3.77 18 Cir 5.000 46.00 47.38 27.600 708.75* 708.75* 0.07 708.83 7 Curb-Horiz 12 Grand Ave at APN 203-293-01 13.40 18 Cir 15.000 35.58 37.64 13.733 161.54* 161.78* 0.89 162.68 1 Curb-Horiz Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 10-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Return period= 10 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; i -Inlet control. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station Len DmgArea Rnoff AreaxC Tc Rain Total Cap Vel Pipe Invert Elev HGLEiev Gmd I Rim Elev LineiD co elf (I) flow full Line To I ncr Total I ncr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/s) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 5.000 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 21.49 0.0 11.2 2.7 68.31 7.07 55.67 15 1.20 35.52 35.58 36.77 42.39 41.00 40.96 Grand Ave at State 2 1 167.00C 2.80 23.00 0.84 2.35 19.39 7.2 11.2 2.7 54.91 3.57 44.75 15 0.31 35.58 36.09 161.54 282.34 40.96 40.67 Grand Ave at State 3 2 308.00( 0.00 20.20 0.00 0.00 17.03 0.0 11.1 2.7 50.18 7.02 40.89 15 1.18 36.09 39.73 297.91 483.92 40.67 46.09 Grand w/of Roosev 4 3 40.000 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 5.0 5.0 4.5 3.62 17.24 2.95 15 7.13 39.73 42.58 509.91 510.03 46.09 46.20 Roosevelt s/of Gra 5 3 115.00( 1.90 19.30 0.84 1.60 16.22 7.0 11.0 2.7 46.56 9.56 37.94 15 2.19 39.73 42.25 509.91 569.71 46.09 48.77 Grand e/of Roosev 6 5 235.00( 0.00 17.40 0.00 0.00 14.63 0.0 10.9 2.7 43.07 4.65 35.10 15 0.52 42.25 43.47 580.90 685.46 48.77 49.13 Grand along Chas 7 6 37.000 0.90 2.30 0.84 0.76 1.94 5.0 6.4 3.8 34.93 9.46 19.77 18 0.81 44.05 44.35 696.76 700.85 49.13 48.17 Madison s/of Gran 8 7 38.000 0.20 0.20 0.90 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 4.5 0.80 21.88 0.45 18 4.34 44.35 46.00 708.75 708.75 48.17 48.24 Madison s/of Gran 9 6 33.000 0.00 15.10 0.00 0.00 12.68 0.0 10.8 2.7 8.14 9.14 4.61 18 0.76 43.47 43.72 696.76 696.95 49.13 49.28 Grand at Madison 10 9 110.00C 15.10 15.10 0.84 12.68 12.68 10.6 10.6 2.8 8.14 7.03 10.36 12 3.90 43.72 48.01 697.00 702.75 49.28 50.11 Grand e/of Madiso 11 7 5.000 1.20 1.20 0.84 1.01 1.01 6.3 6.3 3.9 3.77 55.17 2.14 18 27.60 46.00 47.38 708.75 708.75 48.17 47.92 Madison s/of Gran 12 1 15.000 2.50 2.50 0.84 2.10 2.10 7.0 7.0 3.6 13.40 38.92 7.58 18 13.73 35.58 37.64 161.54 161.78 40.96 41.37 Grand Ave at APN Project File: Grand Ave Exstm I 10-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Intensity= 12.86/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period= 10 Yrs. ; Total flows limited to inlet captured flows. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Inlet Report Page 1 Line lnletiD Q= Q Q Q June Curb Inlet Grate Inlet Gutter Inlet Byp No CIA carry capt byp type line Ht L area L w So w Sw Sx n Depth Spread Depth Spread Depr No (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in) (ft) (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ftfft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (in) 1 New 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 2 Ex. Inlet 507 Grand 8.32 2.26 4.74 5.84 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.48 18.87 0.69 17.93 4.0 12 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off ' 4 Ex. Inlet Roosevelt 3.62 0.00 3.62 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.45 17.25 0.68 17.25 4.0 Off 5 Ex. Inlet at 645 Gra 5.75 0.00 3.49 2.26 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.35 12.37 0.55 10.78 4.0 2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 7 Ex. Inlet Chase Ba 3.38 26.98 30.35 0.00 Curb 6.0 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 1.18 54.20 1.42 54.20 4.0 Off 8 Ex Inlet Chase Ban 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.005 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.22 6.03 0.36 1.47 4.0 7 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 10 Ex Inlet 725 Grand 35.00 0.00 8.14 26.87 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.60 25.07 0.82 24.38 4.0 7 I 11 3.88 0.00 3.77 0.11 Curb 6.0 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.31 10.52 0.50 8.53 4.0 7 12 Inlet at All America 7.56 5.84 13.40 0.00 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.86 38.22 1.10 38.22 4.0 Off Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 1D-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Inlet N-Values = 0.016; Intensity= 12.86/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) 11 0.65; Return period= 10 Yrs. ; • Indicates Known Q added. All curb inletS are Horiz throat. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 15 68.31 35.52 36.77 1.25 1.23 55.68 48.20 84.97 nta 5.000 35.58 42.39 1.25** 1.23 55.67 48.18 90.56i n/a nla -42.581 0.54 nla 2 15 54.91 35.58 161.54 1.25 1.23 44.75 31.14 192.68 72.344 167.00 36.09 282.34 1.25** 1.23 44.75 31.13 313.47 72.317 72.330 120.79 0.50 15.56 3 15 50.18 36.09 297.91 1.25 1.23 40.89 26.00 323.91 60.401 308.00 39.73 483.92 1.25** 1.23 40.89 25.99 509.91 60.379 60.390 186.00 1.00 25.99 4 15 3.62 39.73 509.91 1.25 1.23 2.95 0.14 510.04 0.314 40.000 42.58 510.03 1.25 1.23 2.95 0.14 510.17 0.314 0.314 0.125 1.00 0.14 5 15 46.56 39.73 509.91 1.25 1.23 37.95 22.39 532.30 52.008 115.00 42.25 569.71 1.25** 1.23 37.94 22.38 592.09 51.989 51.998 59.80 0.50 11.19 6 15 43.07 42.25 580.90 1.25 1.23 35.10 19.15 600.06 44.497 235.00 43.47 685.46 1.25** 1.23 35.09 19.15 704.61 44.480 44.489 104.55 0.59 11.30 7 18 34.93 44.05 696.76 1.50 1.77 19.77 6.08 702.83 11.067 37.000 44.35 700.85 1.50** 1.77 19.77 6.07 706.93 11.063 11.065 4.094 1.30 7.90 8 18 0.80 44.35 708.75 1.50 1.77 0.45 0.00 708.75 0.006 38.000 46.00 708.75 1.50 1.77 0.45 0.00 708.75 0.006 0.006 0.002 1.00 0.00 9 18 8.14 43.47 696.76 1.50 1.77 4.61 0.33 697.09 0.601 33.000 43.72 696.95 1.50 1.77 4.61 0.33 697.28 0.601 0.601 0.198 0.15 0.05 10 12 8.14 43.72 697.00 1.00 0.79 10.36 1.67 698.67 5.224 110.00 48.01 702.75 1.00 0.79 10.36 1.67 704.42 5.222 5.223 5.746 1.00 1.67 11 18 3.77 46.00 708.75 1.50 1.77 2.14 0.07 708.82 0.129 5.000 47.38 708.75 1.50 1.77 2.14 0.07 708.83 0.129 0.129 0.006 1.00 0.07 12 18 13.40 35.58 161.54 1.50 1.77 7.59 0.89 162.43 1.629 15.000 37.64 161.78 1.50 1.77 7.58 0.89 162.68 1.629 1.629 0.244 1.00 0.89 Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 10-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 _\ Run Date: 03..07-2013 Notes: ; •• Critical depth. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2009 Plan 5 6 ~tfall e4:~. 2 3 • • • Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm 2-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Date: 03-07-2013 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension -.6.066 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns Junction No. rate size shape length ELDn ELUp slope down up loss Junct line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Grand Ave at State Street 48.23 15 Cir 5.000 35.52 35.58 1.200 36.77* 39.57* n/a 98.69i End Manhole 2 Grand Ave at State Street(2) 39.74 15 Cir 167.000 35.58 36.09 0.305 98.69* 161.96* 8.15 170.11 1 Curb-Horiz 3 Grand w/of Roosevelt 35.86 15 Cir 308.000 36.09 39.73 1.182 170.11* 265.11* 13.27 278.38 2 Manhole 4 Roosevelt s/of Grand 2.56 15 Cir 40.000 39.73 42.58 7.125 278.38* 278.45* 0.07 278.51 3 Curb-Horiz 5 Grand e/of Roosevelt 33.30 15 Cir 115.000 39.73 42.25 2.191 278.38* 308.97* 5.72 314.70 3 Curb-Horiz 6 Grand along Chase Bank 30.39 15 Cir 235.000 42.25 43.47 0.519 314.70* 366.77* 5.63 372.39 5 Manhole 7 Madison s/of Grand #1 23.45 18 Cir 37.000 44.05 44.35 0.811 372.39* 374.24* 3.56 377.80 6 Curb-Horiz 8 Madison s/of Grand #2 0.57 18 Cir 38.000 44.35 46.00 4.342 377.80* 377.80* 0.00 377.80 7 Curb-Horiz 9 Grand at Madison 6.94 18 Cir 33.000 43.47 43.72 0.758 372.39* 372.54* 0.04 372.57 6 Manhole 10 Grand e/of Madison 6.94 12 Cir 110.000 43.72 48.01 3.900 372.57* 376.76* 1.22 377.97 9 Curb-Horiz 11 Madison s/of Grand #5 2.75 18 Cir 5.000 46.00 47.38 27.600 377.80" 377.80* 0.04 377.84 7 Curb-Horiz 12 Grand Ave at APN 203-293-01 8.49 18 Cir 15.000 35.58 37.64 13.733 98.69* 98.79* 0.36 99.14 1 Curb-Horiz Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 2-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Return period = 2 Yrs. ; •surcharged (HGL above cra.vn). ; i -Inlet control. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension 116.066 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station len OmgArea Rnoff AreaxC Tc Rain Total Cap Vel Pipe Invert Elev HGLEiev Gmd I Rim Elev Line 10 coeff (I) flow full line To I ncr Total I ncr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope On Up On Up On Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ftls) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 5.000 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 21.49 0.0 11.4 1.9 48.23 7.07 39.31 15 1.20 35.52 35.58 36.77 39.57 41.00 40.96 Grand Ave at State 2 1 167.00( 2.80 23.00 0.84 2.35 19.39 7.2 11.4 1.9 39.74 3.57 32.39 15 0.31 35.58 36.09 98.69 161.96 40.96 40.67 Grand Ave at State 3 2 308.00( 0.00 20.20 0.00 0.00 17.03 0.0 11.2 1.9 35.86 7.02 29.22 15 1.18 36.09 39.73 170.11 265.11 40.67 46.09 Grand w/of Roosev 4 3 40.000 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 5.0 5.0 3.2 2.56 17.24 2.09 15 7.13 39.73 42.58 278.38 278.45 46.09 46.20 Roosevelt s/of Gra 5 3 115.00( 1.90 19.30 0.84 1.60 16.22 7.0 11.1 1.9 33.30 9.56 27.14 15 2.19 39.73 42.25 278.38 308.97 46.09 48.77 Grand e/of Roosev 6 5 235.00C 0.00 17.40 0.00 0.00 14.63 0.0 10.9 1.9 30.39 4.65 24.77 15 0.52 42.25 43.47 314.70 366.77 48.77 49.13 Grand along Chas 7 6 37.000 0.90 2.30 0.84 0.76 1.94 5.0 7.0 2.6 23.45 9.46 13.27 18 0.81 44.05 44.35 372.39 374.24 49.13 48.17 Madison s/of Gran 8 7 38.000 0.20 0.20 0.90 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 3.2 0.57 21.88 0.32 18 4.34 44.35 46.00 377.80 377.80 48.17 48.24 Madison s/of Gran 9 6 33.000 0.00 15.10 0.00 0.00 12.68 0.0 10.8 1.9 6.94 9.14 3.93 18 0.76 43.47 43.72 372.39 372.54 49.13 49.28 Grand at Madison 10 9 110.00C 15.10 15.10 0.84 12.68 12.68 10.6 10.6 1.9 6.94 7.03 8.84 12 3.90 43.72 48.01 372.57 376.76 49.28 50.11 Grand e/of Madiso 11 7 5.000 1.20 1.20 0.84 1.01 1.01 6.3 6.3 2.7 2.75 55.17 1.55 18 27.60 46.00 47.38 377.80 377.80 48.17 47.92 Madison s/of Gran 12 1 15.000 2.50 2.50 0.84 2.10 2.10 7.0 7.0 2.5 8.49 38.92 4.81 18 13.73 35.58 37.64 98.69 98.79 40.96 41.37 Grand Ave at APN Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 2-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Intensity= 9.16/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Retum period= 2 Yrs. ; Total flows limited to inlet captured flows. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on IJ6.066 Inlet Report Page 1 Une lnletiD Q= Q Q Q June Curb Inlet Grate Inlet Gutter Inlet Byp No CIA carry capt byp type line Ht L area L w So w Sw Sx n Depth Spread Depth Spread Depr No (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in) (ft) (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (in) 1 New 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 2 Ex. Inlet 507 Grand 5.88 1.15 3.88 3.15 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.42 16.12 0.63 14.93 4.0 12 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 4 Ex. Inlet Roosevelt 2.56 0.00 2.56 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.37 13.68 0.61 13.68 4.0 Off 5 Ex. Inlet at 645 Gra 4.06 0.00 2.91 1.15 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.31 10.72 0.51 8.78 4.0 2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 7 Ex. Inlet Chase Ba 2.39 17.74 20.13 0.00 Curb 6.0 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.92 41.17 1.16 41.17 4.0 Off 8 Ex Inlet Chase Ban 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.005 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.20 4.98 0.31 1.30 4.0 7 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 10 Ex Inlet 725 Grand 24.69 0.00 6.94 17.74 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.54 21.92 0.76 21.13 4.0 7 11 2.75 0.00 2.75 0.00 Curb 6.0 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.28 9.07 0.47 6.63 4.0 7 12 Inlet at All America 5.34 3.15 8.49 0.00 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.66 28.16 0.90 28.16 4.0 Off Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 2-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 J Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Inlet N-Values = 0.016; Intensity= 9.16/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period = 2 Yrs. ; • Indicates Known Q added. All curb inlets are Horiz throat. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on v6.066 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 15 48.23 35.52 36.77 1.25 1.23 39.31 24.03 60.80 nla 5.000 35.58 39.57 1.25** 1.23 39.30 24.02 63.59i nla nla -21.22E 0.54 n/a 2 15 39.74 35.58 98.69 1.25 1.23 32.39 16.31 115.00 37.890 167.00 36.09 161.96 1.25** 1.23 32.38 16.30 178.26 37.876 37.883 63.26 0.50 8.15 3 15 35.86 36.09 170.11 1.25 1.23 29.23 13.28 183.39 30.848 308.00 39.73 265.11 1.25** 1.23 29.22 13.27 278.38 30.837 30.842 94.99 1.00 13.27 4 15 2.56 39.73 278.38 1.25 1.23 2.09 0.07 278.45 0.157 40.000 42.58 278.45 1.25 1.23 2.09 0.07 278.51 0.157 0.157 0.063 1.00 0.07 5 15 33.30 39.73 278.38 1.25 1.23 27.14 11.45 289.83 26.602 115.00 42.25 308.97 1.25** 1.23 27.13 11.45 320.42 26.592 26.597 30.59 0.50 5.72 6 15 30.39 42.25 314.70 1.25 1.23 24.77 9.54 324.24 22.159 235.00 43.47 366.77 1.25** 1.23 24.76 9.54 376.30 22.151 22.155 52.06 0.59 5.63 7 18 23.45 44.05 372.39 1.50 1.77 13.27 2.74 375.13 4.987 37.000 44.35 374.24 1.50 1.77 13.27 2.74 376.97 4.985 4.986 1.845 1.30 3.56 8 18 0.57 44.35 377.80 1.50 1.77 0.32 0.00 377.80 0.003 38.000 46.00 377.80 1.50 1.77 0.32 0.00 377.80 0.003 0.003 0.001 1.00 0.00 9 18 6.94 43.47 372.39 1.50 1.77 3.93 0.24 372.63 0.438 33.000 43.72 372.54 1.50 1.77 3.93 0.24 372.78 0.437 0.437 0.144 0.15 0.04 10 12 6.94 43.72 372.57 1.00 0.79 8.84 1.22 373.79 3.804 110.00 48.01 376.76 1.00 0.79 8.84 1.22 377.97 3.803 3.803 4.184 1.00 1.22 11 18 2.75 46.00 377.80 1.50 1.77 1.55 0.04 377.83 0.068 5.000 47.38 377.80 1.50 1.77 1.55 0.04 377.84 0.068 0.068 0.003 1.00 0.04 12 18 8.49 35.58 98.69 1.50 1.77 4.81 0.36 99.05 0.655 15.000 37.64 98.79 1.50 1.77 4.81 0.36 99.14 0.654 0.654 0.098 1.00 0.36 I I I Project File: Grand Ave Ex.stm I 2-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-D7 -2013 Notes: ; ** Critical depth. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers ExtensiOn \'6.066 APPENDIX D-Existing Condition Street Capacity Calculations LEGEND: 1-1 CROSS SECTION 60 .lO 0 I t;• i I}() ' 180 I SCALI: 1M 60' CARLSBAD NW QUADRANT CROSS SECTION MAP GRAND AVENUE 2 ~ ~ ;o ·,: "' ,,, i5 : ~ ~ ;.) ~ ~ ::l / ~ ' ~-·~· .... ~ •• ·-····· .. •• 0 ~ •........................................................................................................................................... . . . ~~~=~== ~ CON8ULTINQ ~ -I'M......,. ._,.._ Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Start Station Cross Section 1-1-100YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+12 0+23 0+35 0+36 0+36 0.01500 tUft 53.60 tt•ts Elevation (ft) Ending Station 51.47 51.34 50.89 4992 49.85 50.36 (0+00, 51.47) (0+36, 50.36) Options ~.;urrent Kougnness vve1gntea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Results Normal Depth Elevation Range · Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Normal Depth Palltovskii's Method Palltovskii's Method Palltovskii's Method 49.85 to 51.47 ft 1.02 7.03 14.12 0.50 13.20 1.02 ft ft2 ft ft ft ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Hustad Methods SOlution Center Roughness Coefficient 0.015 Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:38:27 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766·1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF lnputData Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/20131:38:27 PM Supercritical 1.34 ft 0.00421 ftlft 7.62 ft/s 0.90 ft 1.93 ft 1.84 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ftls Infinity ft/s 1.02 ft 1.34 ft 0.01500 ft/ft 0.00421 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section 1·1· 100YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0.01500 ftlft 1.02 ft 53.60 ft'/s Cross Section Image c 0 'i > II) ii.i 51.60 51.40 51.20 51.00 50.80 50.60 50.40 50.20 50.00 49.80 49·68+oo ci+Os '0+1 o '0+15 , ci+2o 0+25 '0+30 0+35 station Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:39:60 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project· Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ftJ Roughness Segment Definitions ' Start Station Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+10 0+25 0+36 0+38 0+38 0.01500 tuft 8.80 ft'/s 48.71 48.68 48.54 48.19 48.09 48.71 (0+00, 48.71) (0+38, 48.71) 0.015 Options ~.;urrent Kougnness vve1gmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Normal Depth Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 48.09 to 48.71 ft 0.42 2.28 12.66 0.18 12.29 0.42 ft ft2 ft ft ft ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:40:12 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766·1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/20131:40:12 PM Cross Section 1-2 • 100YR Supercritical 0.51 ft 0.00590 ftlft 3.87 ft/s 0.23 ft 0.65 ft 1.58 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.42 ft 0.51 ft 0.01500 ftlft 0.00590 ftlft Bentley Systems, Inc. Hustad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766·1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section Image 48.90. 48.80 48.70 r""-!--~ 48.60 c 48.50 .Q l 48.40 G) iiJ 48.30 48.00 47.90. 0+00 0+10 Cross Section 1·2 • 100YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+20 Station 0+30 0.01500 ft/ft 0.42 ft 8.80 tt•ts Bentley Systems, Inc. Hustad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:40:26 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Start Station Cross Section 1-3 • 100YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+01 0+13 0+23 0+29 0+30 0+30 0. 00600 tUft 12.70 ft3/s Elevation (ft) 42.41 41.81 41.74 41.40 40.88 40.80 41.45 Ending Station Roughness Coefficient (0+00, 42.41) (0+30, 41.45) 0.015 Options t;urrem Kougnness vvetgmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Results Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 40.80 to 42.41 ft 0.74 ft 3.66 ft2 12.07 ft 0.30 ft 11.44 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1 :40:40 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766·1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Normal Depth Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/20131:40:40 PM Supercritical 0.74 ft 0.76 ft 0.00511 ft/ft 3.47 ft/s 0.19 ft 0.93 ft 1.08 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.74 ft 0.76 ft 0.00600 ft/ft 0.00511 ftlft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766-1666 Page 2 of 2 Cross Section 1-3-100VR Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section Image 42.60 42.40 42.20 42.00 c 41.80 0 1! 41.60 4) iii 41.40 41.20. 41.00 40.80. Manning Formula Normal Depth 40.60 ··'--:-, .........,,,.--.,..., .......,.., ----:.-+-;--.,...-+-...,..-....,--+---,-+-:---1 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 stettion 0. 00600 tUft 0. 74 ft 12.70 fP/s Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 316/20131:40:61 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 ProjeCt Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+00 0+11 0+21 0+26 0+27 0+27 0. 00300 tuft 19.10 fP/s < '· ' ~ ,. '•, . ~~e~~~(tt) 42.06 41.57 41.47 41.36 41.10 40.94 41.52 (0+00, 42.06) (0+27, 41.52) 0.015 ~..;urrem Kougnness vvetgmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 40.94 to 42.06 ft 0.77 ft 8.02 ft2 27.58 ft 0.29 ft 26.91 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:41:06 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Normal Depth Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/20131:41:06 PM Cross Section 1-4-100YR Subcritical 0.77 ft 0.72 ft 0.00536 fllft 2.38 ftls 0.09 ft 0.85 ft 0.77 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity fils Infinity fils 0.77 ft 0.72 ft 0.00300 fllft 0.00536 fllft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section Image Manning Formula Normal Depth 42.30 .-----,---,....---..,..---,-----.,--...., 42.20 42.10 42.00 41.90 41.80" 41.70. )-o!-----i---~~---o!----- :5 41.60: ~ 41.50" £ 41.40. 41.30 41.20 41.10' 41.00 40.90. 40.ao·· 40.70 ......... -i-,--~--,-----:--+-:--~:-:----.--+-,--...,.--1 0+00 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 station 0.00300 tuft 0. 77 ft 19.10 tt•Js Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:41:18 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 1 of 1 • Project.·Description. Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions · starfstatiOn Cross Section 1-1 • 10YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+12 0+23 0+35 0+36 0+36 0.01500 ftlft 35.00 tt•ts ElevatiOn (ft) 51.47 51.34 50.89 49.92 49.85 50.36 (0+00, 51.47) (0+36, 50.36) Options Lurrent Kougnness vve1gmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method ResUlts Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Normal Depth Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 49.85 to 51.47 ft 0.87 ft 5.11 ft2 12.03 ft 0.42 ft 11.27 ft 0.87 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Hustad Methods Solution Center 0.015 Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 316/20131:41:32 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headless Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/20131:41:32 PM Supercritical 1.12 ft 0. 0043 7 ft/ft 6.85 ft/s 0.73 ft 1.60 ft 1.79 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.87 ft 1.12 ft 0.01500 ft/ft 0.00437 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766-1666 Page 2 of 2 • Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section 1·1 • 10YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0.01500 tUft 0.87 ft 35.00 n•ts Cross Section Image 51.60 51.40 51.20 51.00. § 50.80 13 ii 50.60' jjj 50.40 50.20 50.00 49.80 49.60 . ' ''. ' ' ' ''' '' ' 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 Station Bentley Systems, Inc. Haested Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/20131:41:49 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Cross Section 1·2 • 10YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+10 0+25 0+36 0+38 0+38 0.01500 tUft 5.80 ft'/s Elevation (ft) ) "<:, --~~S~Qr\ 48.71 48.68 48.54 48.19 48.09 48.71 (0+00, 48.71) (0+38, 48.71} 0.015 Options. ~.;urrent Kougnness vve1gmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Normal Depth Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 48.09 to 48.71 ft 0.37 ft 1.66 ft2 10.79 ft 0.15 ft 10.47 ft 0.37 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:42:07 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766·1666 Page 1 of 2 • Results Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF lnputOata Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 31612013 1 :42:07 PM Cross Section 1-2 · 10YR Supercritical 0.43 ft 0.00595 fllft 3.49 fils 0.19 ft 0.55 ft 1.54 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity fils Infinity fils 0.37 ft 0.43 ft 0.01500 fllft 0.00595 fllft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross ·section Image c .Q 48.90. l 48.40 ..!! w 48.30 48.20 48.10 48.00 47.90 Cross Section 1-2 -10VR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0.01500 fUft 0.37 ft 5.80 ft'/s -~~~~~~~--~~~--~~~ 0+00 316/2013 1:42:24 PM 0+10 0+20 station 0+30 Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 • • ProjeCt Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Start Station Cross Section 1·3 • 10YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+01 0+13 0+23 0+29 0+30 0+30 0. 00600 ft/ft 8.30 fP/s Elevation (ft) 42.41 41.81 41.74 41.40 40.88 40.80 41.45 Ending Station Rougtmess Coefficient (0+00, 42.41) (0+30, 41.45) 0.015 Options ~.;urrent Kougnness vve~gmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Results Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Pavtovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 40.80 to 42.41 ft 0.61 ft 2.43 ft2 8.21 ft 0.30 ft 7.70 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 316/2013 1:43:37 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766-1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Normal Depth Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data. Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/2013 1:43:37 PM Cross Section 1-3-10YR Supercritical 0.61 ft 0.64 ft 0.00524 ftlft 3.41 ft/s 0.18 ft 0.79 ft 1.07 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity fVs Infinity ft/s 0.61 ft 0.64 ft 0.00600 ftlft 0.00524 ftlft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 2 of 2 Cross Section 1·3 • 10YR Project· Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section Image 42.60 42.40_ 42.20 42.00 6 41.80 -!-----........:. l 41.60. 4) iii 41.40. 41.20 41.00 40.80. Manning Formula Normal Depth 40.60 .......,.-+-,.....-..,...-+-;.-'1"". +. -;-, --;,-+-,, ---;-, -+-:-.,...-:-....,......... 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 station 0. 00600 tUft 0.61 ft 8.30 tt•ts Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:43:66 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project . DesCriptipn Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Cross Section 1-4-10YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+00 0+11 0+21 0+26 0+27 0+27 0.00300 ft/ft 11.70 ft'/s ~.Elevation (ft) 42.06 41.57 41.47 41.36 41.10 40.94 41.52 (0+00, 42.06) (0+27, 41.52) 0.015 Options. ~.;urrent Kougnness vvetgmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Results··· Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 40.94 to 42.06 ft 0.69 ft 5.96 ft2 27.40 ft 0.22 ft 26.85 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:44:12 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Normal Depth Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/2013 1:44:12 PM Cross Section 1-4 • 10YR Subcritical 0.69 ft 0.65 ft 0.00594 fUft 1.96 ft/s 0.06 ft 0.75 ft 0.73 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity fUs 0.69 ft 0.65 ft 0.00300 ft/ft 0.00594 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766·1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Manning Formula Normal Depth 0. 00300 ftlft 0.69 ft 11.70 fP/s Cross Section Image 42.30 42.20 42.10 42.00. 41.90 41.80 41.70 !5 41.60 l 41.50 ~ 41.40 41.30 41.20 41.10 41.00 40.90 40.80 40.70 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 station Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03) 3/6/2013 1 :44:26 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (fl) Roughness Segment Definitions Start $tation Cross Section 1·1· 2YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+12 0+23 0+35 0+36 0+36 0.01500 ft/ft 24.70 ft3/s Elevation {ft) Ending station 51.47 51.34 50.89 49.92 49.85 50.36 Roughness Coefficient (0+00, 51.47) (0+36, 50.36) 0.015 Options t;urrem Kougnness vvetgmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Results Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Normal Depth Pavtovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavtovskii's Method 49.85 to 51.47 ft 0.76 ft 3.93 ft2 10.55 ft 0.37 ft 9.91 ft 0.76 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:44:47 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/2013 1:44:47 PM Supercritical 0.96 ft 0.00452 ftlft 6.28 fUs 0.61 ft 1.37 ft 1.76 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity fUs Infinity fVs 0.76 ft 0.96 ft 0.01500 tuft 0.00452 ftlft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 2 of 2 Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section 1·1· 2YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0.01500 ft/ft 0.76 ft 24.70 tt•ts Cross Section lrnage c: 0 'i > .!! w 51.60 51.40 51.20 51.00 50.80 50.60 50.40 50.20 50.00 . ' 49·68+00 O+OS. 0+10 '0+1S 'ri+20 0+2S '0+30. O+JS station Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1 :46:09 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 1 of 1 ProjeCt Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions S~ion(ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+10 0+25 0+36 0+38 0+38 (0+00, 48.71) Options, ~..;urrent Kougnness vve~gmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Normal Depth Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method 48.09 to 48.71 ft 0.01500 ft/ft 4.10 ft'/s EleVation (ft) 48.71 48.68 48.54 48.19 48.09 48.71 (0+38, 48.71) 0.33 ft 1.28 f12 9.44 fl 0.14 ft 9.15 ft 0.33 ft 0.015 Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/20131:46:24 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/2013 1 :46:24 PM Cross Section 1-2-2YR Supercritical 0.38 ft 0.00624 ft/ft 3.20 ft/s 0.16 ft 0.49 ft 1.51 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.33 ft 0.38 ft 0.01500 ft/ft 0.00624 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203-766·1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Deseription Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section Image 48.90 48.80. 48.70 r--;._--....._ c: 48.50 0 ~ 48.40 II) w 48.30 48.20 48.00 47.90 0+00 0+10 Cross Section 1·2 • 2YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+20 Station 0+30 0.01500 ft/ft 0.33 ft 4.10 ft'/s Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:46:37 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766-1666 Page 1 of Project.Descriptlon Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Stati011 (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions Cross Section 1-3 • 2YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+01 0+13 0+23 0+29 0+30 0+30 0. 00600 ft/ft 5.90 ff/s Elevation (ft) 42.41 41.81 41.74 41.40 40.88 40.80 41.45 Ehdfng Station (0+00, 42.41) (0+30, 41.45) 0.015 Options ~.;urrenr t-<ougnness vve1gnrea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting MethOd Resul'ts Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Pavtovskii's MethOd Pavlovskii's MethOd PaV!ovskii's Method 40.80to42.41 ft 0.53 ft 1.86 ft2 6.99 ft 0.27 ft 6.55 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster {08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:46:62 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1 -203-766-1666 Page 1 of 2 Results Normal Depth Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/6/2013 1:46:62 PM Cross Section 1-3 • 2YR Supercritical 0.53 ft 0.54 ft 0.00540 ftlft 3.17 ft/s 0.16 ft 0.69 ft 1.05 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.53 ft 0.54 ft 0.00600 ftlft 0.00540 ftlft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 2 of 2 Cross Section 1-3-2YR Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section lm~ge 42.60. 42.40 42.20. 42.00 c: 41.80. ~-----.......:.._ 0 l 41.60 Q) iiJ 41 .40 41.20 41.00. 40.80. Manning Formula Normal Depth 40.60 .......,............,.,-,..., ......,..... ----;-, -+---;-,.-+-, .,.., ----;-, -+---;-,..-i-..,.--1 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 Station 0. 00600 tuft 0.53 ft 5.90 tt•ts Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:46:07 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Discharge Section Definitions Station (ft) Roughness Segment Definitions ; ' 'suirt Statiorl Cross Section 1-4 -2YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0+00 0+00 0+11 0+21 0+26 0+27 0+27 0. 00300 tUft 7.70 tt•ts Elevation (ft) 42.06 41.57 41.47 41.36 41.10 40.94 41.52 EndinQ. station (0+00, 42.06) (0+27, 41.52) 0.015 Options ~,.;urrem Kougnness vve1gmea Method Open Channel Weighting Method Closed Channel Weighting Method Results Normal Depth Elevation Range Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Pavtovskii's Method Pavlovskii's Method Pavtovskii's Method 40.94 to 42.06 ft 0.64 ft 4.63 ft2 27.29 ft 0.17 ft 26.82 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/20131:46:20 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-766-1666 Page 1 of 2 Cross Section 1·4 • 2YR Results Normal Depth 0.64 ft Critical Depth 0.59 ft Critical Slope 0.00629 fVft Velocity 1.66 fVs Velocity Head 0.04 ft Specific Energy 0.68 ft Froude Number 0.71 Flow Type Subcritical GVF Input Data Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft Number Of Steps 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity Infinity fVs Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 0.64 ft Critical Depth 0.59 ft Channel Slope 0.00300 ftlft Critical Slope 0.00629 ftlft Bentley Systems, Inc. Hustad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6120131:46:20 PM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Channel Slope Normal Depth Discharge Cross Section 1-4-2YR Manning Formula Normal Depth 0. 00300 ft/ft 0.64 ft 7.70 tt•Js Cross Section Image 42.30 42.20: 42.10 42.00. 41.90: 41.ao· 41.70 5 41.60: ~ 41.50. ~ 41.40 41.30 41.20 41.10 41.00 40.90 4o.ao· 40.70 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 Station Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.03] 3/6/2013 1:46:36 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watei10WI'!, CT 06796 USA +1·203·766·1666 Page 1 of 1 . ' . APPENDIX E-Proposed Condition Hydrology, Inlet, and Pipe Capacity Calculations Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2009 Plan 5 6 ~tfall e4J~. 2 3 • • • Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 100-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Date: 03-07-2013 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension \16.066 _ Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line 10 Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns Junction No. rate size shape length ELDn ELUp slope down up loss Junct line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Grand Ave at State Street 104.5 48 Cir 5.000 33.52 33.58 1.200 37.52 37.54 n/a 38.37 i End Manhole 2 Grand Ave at State Street(2) 90.06 48 Cir 167.000 33.58 34.09 0.305 38.37* 39.02* 0.40 39.42 1 Curb-Horiz 3 Grand w/of Roosevelt 75.71 48 Cir 308.000 34.09 37.73 1.182 39.42 40.30 n/a 42.19 i 2 Manhole 4 Roosevelt s/of Grand 5.53 15 Cir 40.000 39.73 42.58 7.125 42.19 43.52 n/a 44.31 i 3 Curb-Horiz 5 Grand e/of Roosevelt 70.18 48 Cir 115.000 37.73 40.25 2.191 42.19 42.73 n/a 44.47 i 3 Curb-Horiz 6 Grand along Chase Bank 65.87 48 Cir 235.000 40.25 41.47 0.519 44.47 44.85 0.31 45.16 5 Manhole 7 Madison s/of Grand #1 22.32 24 Cir 37.000 43.05 43.35 0.811 45.16* 45.52* n/a 46.39 i 6 Curb-Horiz 8 Madison s/of Grand #2 1.23 18 Cir 38.000 44.35 46.00 4.342 46.39 46.42 n/a 46.58i 7 Curb-Horiz 9 Grand at Madison 43.56 48 Cir 33.000 41.47 41.72 0.758 45.16 45.16 0.03 45.20 6 Manhole 10 Grand e/of Madison 43.56 48 Cir 110.000 41.72 41.01 -0.645 45.20* 45.33* 0.19 45.51 9 Curb-Horiz 11 Madison s/of Grand #5 5.94 18 Cir 5.000 44.35 44.36 0.200 46.39* 46.41* 0.18 46.58 7 Open Headwall 12 Grand Ave at APN 203-293-01 14.41 18 Cir 15.000 35.58 37.64 13.733 38.37 39.03 n/a 41.20 i 1 Curb-Horiz Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 100-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Return period= 100 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; i -Inlet control. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension 116.066 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station Len DmgArea Rnoff AreaxC Tc Rain Total Cap Vel Pipe Invert Elev HGLEiev Gmd I Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To I ncr Total I ncr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ftls) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 5.000 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 21.49 0.0 13.3 3.6 104.5 157.4 8.32 48 1.20 33.52 33.58 37.52 37.54 41.00 40.96 Grand Ave at State 2 1 167.00( 2.80 23.00 0.84 2.35 19.39 7.2 12.9 3.7 90.06 79.38 7.17 48 0.31 33.58 34.09 38.37 39.02 40.96 40.67 Grand Ave at State 3 2 308.00( 0.00 20.20 0.00 0.00 17.03 0.0 12.2 3.8 75.71 156.2 7.44 48 1.18 34.09 37.73 39.42 40.30 40.67 46.09 Grand w/of Roosev 4 3 40.000 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 5.0 5.0 6.8 5.53 17.24 5.04 15 7.13 39.73 42.58 42.19 43.52 46.09 46.20 Roosevelt s/of Gra 5 3 115.00( 1.90 19.30 0.84 1.60 16.22 7.0 12.0 3.9 70.18 212.6 7.08 48 2.19 37.73 40.25 42.19 42.73 46.09 48.77 Grand elof Roosev 6 5 235.000 0.00 17.40 0.00 0.00 14.63 0.0 11.3 4.1 65.87 103.5 5.53 48 0.52 40.25 41.47 44.47 44.85 48.77 49.13 Grand along Chas 7 6 37.000 0.90 2.30 0.84 0.76 1.94 5.0 6.3 5.9 22.32 20.37 7.10 24 0.81 43.05 43.35 45.16 45.52 49.13 48.17 Madison s/of Gran 8 7 38.000 0.20 0.20 0.90 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 6.8 1.23 21.88 1.85 18 4.34 44.35 46.00 46.39 46.42 48.17 48.24 Madison s/of Gran 9 6 33.000 0.00 15.10 0.00 0.00 12.68 0.0 11.1 4.1 43.56 125.0 3.69 48 0.76 41.47 41.72 45.16 45.16 49.13 49.28 Grand at Madison 10 9 110.000 15.10 15.10 0.84 12.68 12.68 10.6 10.6 4.2 43.56 0.00 3.61 48 -0.65 41.72 41.01 45.20 45.33 49.28 50.11 Grand elof Madiso 11 7 5.000 1.20 1.20 0.84 1.01 1.01 6.3 6.3 5.9 5.94 4.70 3.36 18 0.20 44.35 44.36 46.39 46.41 48.17 47.92 Madison s/of Gran 12 1 15.000 2.50 2.50 0.84 2.10 2.10 7.0 7.0 5.5 14.41 38.92 8.28 18 13.73 35.58 37.64 38.37 39.03 40.96 41.37 Grand Ave at APN Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 100-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Intensity= 19.61/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period= 100 Yrs. ; Total flows limited to inlet captured flows. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Inlet Report Page 1 Line lnletiD Q= Q Q Q June Curb Inlet Grate Inlet Gutter Inlet Byp No CIA carry capt byp type line Ht L area L w So w Sw Sx n Depth Spread Depth Spread Depr No (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in) (ft) (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (in) 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 2 Basin 2 -Inlet 507 12.72 4.48 14.36 2.84 Curb 6.0 15.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.56 22.77 0.77 22.03 4.0 12 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 4 Basin 3 -Inlet on R 5.53 0.00 5.53 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.56 22.92 0.79 22.92 4.0 Off 5 Basin 4 -Inlet at 64 8.79 0.00 4.31 4.48 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.39 14.67 0.60 13.38 4.0 2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 7 Basin 5 -Inlet Cha 5.16 9.99 15.15 0.00 Curb 6.0 18.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.53 21.34 0.76 21.34 4.0 Off 8 Basin 6 -Inlet Cha 1.23 0.00 1.23 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.005 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.25 7.38 0.41 3.98 4.0 7 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 10 Basin 8 -Inlet 725 53.55 0.00 43.56 9.99 Curb 6.0 34.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.69 29.47 0.91 28.93 4.0 7 11 Basin 7 -Flow fro 5.94 0.00 5.94 0.00 Hdwl 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 12 Basin 1 -Inlet at 29 11.56 2.84 14.41 0.00 Curb 6.0 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.76 32.90 0.99 32.90 4.0 Off Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 100-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Inlet N-Values = 0.016; Intensity= 19.61/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period= 100 Yrs .. • Indicates Known Q added. All curb inlets are Horiz throat. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on \16.066 --------------------------- Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 48 104.5 33.52 37.52 4.00 12.56 8.32 1.07 38.59 nla 5.000 33.58 37.54 3.96 12.55 8.33 1.08 38.62i n/a nla -1.052 0.54 nla 2 48 90.06 33.58 38.37 4.00 12.56 7.17 0.80 39.16 0.393 167.00 34.09 39.02 4.00 12.57 7.17 0.80 39.82 0.393 0.393 0.657 0.50 0.40 3 48 75.71 34.09 39.42 4.00 12.56 6.03 0.56 39.99 n/a 308.00 37.73 40.30 2.57** 8.55 8.86 1.22 41.52i n/a n/a n/a 1.00 n/a 4 15 5.53 39.73 42.19 1.25 1.23 4.50 0.32 42.51 n/a 40.000 42.58 43.52j 0.94** 0.99 5.58 0.48 44.00i n/a n/a n/a 1.00 n/a 5 48 70.18 37.73 42.19 4.00 12.56 5.59 0.49 42.68 n/a 115.001 40.25 42.73 2.48** 8.18 8.58 1.15 43.87i n/a n/a n/a 0.50 n/a 6 48 65.87 40.25 44.47 4.00 12.56 5.24 0.43 44.90 0.210 235.00 41.47 44.85 3.38 11.33 5.82 0.53 45.38 0.200 0.205 0.482 0.59 0.31 7 24 22.32 43.05 45.16 2.00 3.14 7.10 0.78 45.95 n/a 37.000 43.35 45.52 2.00 3.14 7.10 0.78 46.31i nta n/a -0.424 1.30 n/a 8 18 1.23 44.35 46.39 1.50 1.77 0.70 0.01 46.40 n/a 38.000 46.00 46.42 j 0.42** 0.41 3.00 0.14 46.56i n/a n/a n/a 1.00 n/a 9 48 43.56 41.47 45.16 3.69 12.12 3.59 0.20 45.36 0.080 33.000 41.72 45.16 3.44 11.51 3.79 0.22 45.39 0.085 0.082 0.027 0.15 0.03 10 48 43.56 41.72 45.20 3.48 11.60 3.76 0.22 45.42 0.084 110.00 41.01 45.33 4.00 12.57 3.47 0.19 45.51 0.092 0.088 0.097 1.00 0.19 11 18 5.94 44.35 46.39 1.50 1.77 3.36 0.18 46.57 0.320 5.000 44.36 46.41 1.50 1.77 3.36 0.18 46.58 0.320 0.320 0.016 1.00 0.18 12 18 14.41 35.58 38.37 1.50 1.71 8.16 1.03 39.40 nla 15.000 37.64 39.03 1.39** 1.71 8.41 1.10 40.14i nla n/a n/a 1.00 n/a Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 100-Year Event I j Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 Notes: ; **Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump. ; c = cir e = ellip b =box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2009 Plan 5 6 .rtfall~2. 2 3 • • • Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 10-Year Event j Number of lines: 12 I Date: 03-07-2013 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on v6.066 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line LineiD Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns Junction No. rate size shape length ELDn ELUp slope down up loss Junct line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft} (ft) (ft} No. 1 Grand Ave at State Street 68.31 48 Cir 5.000 33.52 33.58 1.200 37.52 37.53 0.25 37.78 End Manhole 2 Grand Ave at State Street(2) 60.37 48 Cir 167.000 33.58 34.09 0.305 37.78 38.06 0.18 38.24 1 Curb-Horiz 3 Grand w/of Roosevelt 50.18 48 Cir 308.000 34.09 37.73 1.182 38.24 39.83 nla 41.07 i 2 Manhole 4 Roosevelt s/of Grand 3.62 15 Cir 40.000 39.73 42.58 7.125 41.07 43.34 nta 43.82 i 3 Curb-Horiz 5 Grand e/of Roosevelt 46.56 48 Cir 115.000 37.73 40.25 2.191 41.07 42.27 nla 43.43i 3 Curb-Horiz 6 Grand along Chase Bank 43.07 48 Cir 235.000 40.25 41.47 0.519 43.43 43.49 n/a 44.33 i 5 Manhole 7 Madison s/of Grand #1 10.46 24 Cir 37.000 43.05 43.35 0.811 44.33 44.50 n/a 45.20 i 6 Curb-Horiz 8 Madison s/of Grand #2 0.80 18 Cir 38.000 44.35 46.00 4.342 45.20 46.34 nla 46.45 i 7 Curb-Horiz 9 Grand at Madison 32.61 48 Cir 33.000 41.47 41.72 0.758 44.33 44.32 0.03 44.35 6 Manhole 10 Grand e/of Madison 32.61 48 Cir 110.000 41.72 41.01 -0.645 44.35 44.52 0.12 44.64 9 Curb-Horiz 11 Madison s/of Grand #5 3.88 18 Cir 5.000 44.35 44.36 0.200 45.20 45.23 nla 45.34i 7 Open Headwall 12 Grand Ave at APN 203-293-01 7.94 18 Cir 15.000 35.58 37.64 13.733 37.78 38.72 n/a 39.56 i 1 Curb-Horiz Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 10.Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Return period= 10 Yrs. ; i-Inlet control. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension \'6.066 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station Len OmgArea Rnoff AreaxC Tc Rain Total Cap Vel Pipe Invert Elev HGLEiev Gmd I Rim Elev Line 10 coeff (I) flow full Line To I ncr Total I ncr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope On Up On Up On Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/s) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 5.000 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 21.49 0.0 13.8 2.3 68.31 157.4 5.44 48 1.20 33.52 33.58 37.52 37.53 41.00 40.96 Grand Ave at State 2 1 167.000 2.80 23.00 0.84 2.35 19.39 7.2 13.3 2.4 60.37 79.38 4.81 48 0.31 33.58 34.09 37.78 38.06 40.96 40.67 Grand Ave at State 3 2 308.00C 0.00 20.20 0.00 0.00 17.03 0.0 12.4 2.5 50.18 156.2 5.76 48 1.18 34.09 37.73 38.24 39.83 40.67 46.09 Grand w/of Roosev 4 3 40.000 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 5.0 5.0 4.5 3.62 17.24 3.78 15 7.13 39.73 42.58 41.07 43.34 46.09 46.20 Roosevelt s/of Gra 5 3 115.00C 1.90 19.30 0.84 1.60 16.22 7.0 12.0 2.5 46.56 212.6 5.74 48 2.19 37.73 40.25 41.07 42.27 46.09 48.77 Grand e/of Roosev 6 5 235.00C 0.00 17.40 0.00 0.00 14.63 0.0 11.3 2.6 43.07 103.5 5.39 48 0.52 40.25 41.47 43.43 43.49 48.77 49.13 Grand along Chas 7 6 37.000 0.90 2.30 0.84 0.76 1.94 5.0 6.3 3.8 10.46 20.37 5.27 24 0.81 43.05 43.35 44.33 44.50 49.13 48.17 Madison s/of Gran 8 7 38.000 0.20 0.20 0.90 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 4.5 0.80 21.88 1.71 18 4.34 44.35 46.00 45.20 46.34 48.17 48.24 Madison s/of Gran 9 6 33.000 0.00 15.10 0.00 0.00 12.68 0.0 11.2 2.7 32.61 125.0 3.58 48 0.76 41.47 41.72 44.33 44.32 49.13 49.28 Grand at Madison 10 9 110.000 15.10 15.10 0.84 12.68 12.68 10.6 10.6 2.8 32.61 0.00 3.26 48 -0.65 41.72 41.01 44.35 44.52 49.28 50.11 Grand e/of Madiso 11 7 5.000 1.20 1.20 0.84 1.01 1.01 6.3 6.3 3.9 3.88 4.70 3.71 18 0.20 44.35 44.36 45.20 45.23 48.17 47.92 Madison s/of Gran 12 1 15.000 2.50 2.50 0.84 2.10 2.10 7.0 7.0 3.6 7.94 38.92 5.17 18 13.73 35.58 37.64 37.78 38.72 40.96 41.37 Grand Ave at APN Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 10-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Intensity= 12.86 I (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period= 10 Yrs. ; Total flows limited to inlet captured flows. c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension '16.066 Inlet Report Page 1 Line lnletiD Q= Q Q Q June Curb Inlet Grate Inlet Gutter Inlet Byp No CIA carry capt byp type line Ht L area L w So w Sw Sx n Depth Spread Depth Spread Depr No (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in) (ft) (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (in) 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 2 Basin 2 -Inlet 507 8.32 2.26 10.20 0.38 Curb 6.0 15.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.48 18.87 0.69 17.93 4.0 12 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 4 Basin 3 -Inlet on R 3.62 0.00 3.62 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.45 17.25 0.68 17.25 4.0 Off 5 Basin 4 -Inlet at 64 5.75 0.00 3.49 2.26 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.35 12.37 0.55 10.78 4.0 2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 7 Basin 5 -Inlet Cha 3.38 2.39 5.77 0.00 Curb 6.0 18.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.32 11.17 0.56 11.17 4.0 Off 8 Basin 6 -Inlet Cha 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.005 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.22 6.03 0.36 1.47 4.0 7 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 10 Basin 8 -Inlet 725 35.00 0.00 32.61 2.39 Curb 6.0 34.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.60 25.07 0.82 24.38 4.0 7 11 Basin 7 -Flow fro 3.88 0.00 3.88 0.00 Hdwl 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 12 Basin 1 -Inlet at 29 7.56 0.38 7.94 0.00 Curb 6.0 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.54 22.07 0.77 22.07 4.0 Off Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 10-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Inlet N-Values = 0.016; Intensity= 12.86/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period= 10 Yrs .. *Indicates Known Q added. All curb inlets are Horiz throat. Hydra11ow Storm Sewers Extension '16.066 • Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 48 68.31 33.52 37.52 4.00 12.56 5.44 0.46 37.98 0.226 5.000 33.58 37.53 3.95 12.54 5.45 0.46 37.99 0.206 0.216 0.011 0.54 0.25 2 48 60.37 33.58 37.78 4.00 12.56 4.81 0.36 38.14 0.177 167.00 34.09 38.06 3.97 12.55 4.81 0.36 38.42 0.165 0.171 0.285 0.50 0.18 3 48 50.18 34.09 38.24 4.00 12.56 3.99 0.25 38.49 n/a 308.00 37.73 39.83j 2.10** 6.66 7.53 0.88 40.71i n/a n/a nla 1.00 n/a 4 15 3.62 39.73 41.07 1.25 1.23 2.95 0.14 41.21 n/a 40.000 42.58 43.34j 0.76** 0.78 4.62 0.33 43.67i n/a n/a n/a 1.00 n/a 5 48 46.56 37.73 41.07 3.34 11.21 4.15 0.27 41.34 nla 115.00 40.25 42.27j 2.02** 6.36 7.33 0.83 43.10i n/a nla n/a 0.50 n/a 6 48 43.07 40.25 43.43 3.18 10.71 4.02 0.25 43.68 nla 235.00 41.47 43.49 2.02 6.37 6.76 0.71 44.20i nla n/a -0.190 0.59 n/a 7 24 10.46 43.05 44.33 1.28 2.12 4.92 0.38 44.71 nla 37.000 43.35 44.50 1.15** 1.66 5.62 0.49 44.99i nla n/a n/a 1.30 n/a 8 18 0.80 44.35 45.20 0.85 1.03 0.78 0.01 45.21 nla 38.000 46.00 46.34j 0.34** 0.30 2.65 0.11 46.45i nla n/a n/a 1.00 n/a 9 48 32.61 41.47 44.33 2.86 9.62 3.39 0.18 44.51 0.070 33.000 41.72 44.32 2.60 8.64 3.77 0.22 44.54 0.090 0.080 0.026 0.15 0.03 10 48 32.61 41.72 44.35 2.63 8.77 3.72 0.22 44.57 0.087 110.00 41.01 44.52 3.51 11.68 2.79 0.12 44.64 0.047 0.067 0.073 1.00 0.12 11 18 3.88 44.35 45.20 0.85 1.03 3.76 0.22 45.42 n/a 5.000 44.36 45.23 0.87 1.06 3.66 0.21 45.44i n/a n/a -0.192 1.00 nla 12 18 7.94 35.58 37.78 1.50 1.77 4.49 0.31 38.09 n/a 15.000 37.64 38.72j 1.08** 1.36 5.86 0.53 39.25i n/a n/a n/a 1.00 n/a Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 10-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 Notes: ; •• Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on v6.066 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2009 Plan 5 6 2 3 • • • Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 2-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Date: 03-07-2013 Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on v6.066 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns Junction No. rate size shape length ELDn ELUp slope down up loss Junct line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Grand Ave at State Street 48.23 48 Cir 5.000 33.52 33.58 1.200 37.52 37.52 0.12 37.65 End Manhole 2 Grand Ave at State Street(2) 42.89 48 Cir 167.000 33.58 34.09 0.305 37.65 37.77 0.10 37.87 1 Curb-Horiz 3 Grand wlof Roosevelt 35.86 48 Cir 308.000 34.09 37.73 1.182 37.87 39.50 nla 40.42 i 2 Manhole 4 Roosevelt s/of Grand 2.56 15 Cir 40.000 39.73 42.58 7.125 40.42 43.22 n/a 43.56i 3 Curb-Horiz 5 Grand e/of Roosevelt 33.30 48 Cir 115.000 37.73 40.25 2.191 40.42 41.96 n/a 42.82i 3 Curb-Horiz 6 Grand along Chase Bank 30.39 48 Cir 235.000 40.25 41.47 0.519 42.82 43.10 nla 43.90 i 5 Manhole 7 Madison s/of Grand #1 5.81 24 Cir 37.000 43.05 43.35 0.811 43.90 44.20 nla 44.61 i 6 Curb-Horiz 8 Madison s/of Grand #2 0.57 18 Cir 38.000 44.35 46.00 4.342 44.64 46.29 n/a 46.38i 7 Curb-Horiz 9 Grand at Madison 24.58 48 Cir 33.000 41.47 41.72 0.758 43.90 43.87 0.03 43.90 6 Manhole 10 Grand e/of Madison 24.58 48 Cir 110.000 41.72 41.01 -0.645 43.90 44.07 0.09 44.16 9 Curb-Horiz 11 Madison s/r:J Grand #5 2.75 18 Cir 5.000 44.35 44.36 0.200 44.98 45.06 n/a 45.18 i 7 Open Headwall 12 Grand Ave at APN 203-293-01 5.34 18 Cir 15.000 35.58 37.64 13.733 37.65 38.52 n/a 39.07 i 1 Curb-Horiz Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 2-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Retum period = 2 Yrs. : i -Inlet control. Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on v6.066 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station Len DrngArea Rnoff AreaxC Tc Rain Total Cap Vel Pipe Invert Elev HGLEiev Gmd I Rim Elev Line 10 coeff (I) flow full Line To I ncr Total I ncr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope On Up On Up On Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ftls) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 5.000 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 21.49 0.0 14.4 1.6 48.23 157.4 3.84 48 1.20 33.52 33.58 37.52 37.52 41.00 40.96 Grand Ave at State 2 1 167.000 2.80 23.00 0.84 2.35 19.39 7.2 13.6 1.7 42.89 79.38 3.48 48 0.31 33.58 34.09 37.65 37.77 40.96 40.67 Grand Ave at State 3 2 308.000 0.00 20.20 0.00 0.00 17.03 0.0 12.6 1.7 35.86 156.2 4.80 48 1.18 34.09 37.73 37.87 39.50 40.67 46.09 Grand w/of Roosev 4 3 40.000 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 5.0 5.0 3.2 2.56 17.24 3.87 15 7.13 39.73 42.58 40.42 43.22 46.09 46.20 Roosevelt s/of Gra 5 3 115.000 1.90 19.30 0.84 1.60 16.22 7.0 12.2 1.8 33.30 212.6 5.11 48 2.19 37.73 40.25 40.42 41.96 46.09 48.77 Grand e/of Roosev 6 5 235.000 0.00 17.40 0.00 0.00 14.63 0.0 11.4 1.9 30.39 103.5 4.94 48 0.52 40.25 41.47 42.82 43.10 48.77 49.13 Grand along Chas 7 6 37.000 0.90 2.30 0.84 0.76 1.94 5.0 6.3 2.7 5.81 20.37 4.54 24 0.81 43.05 43.35 43.90 44.20 49.13 48.17 Madison s/of Gran 8 7 38.000 0.20 0.20 0.90 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 3.2 0.57 21.88 2.40 18 4.34 44.35 46.00 44.64 46.29 48.17 48.24 Madison s/of Gran 9 6 33.000 0.00 15.10 0.00 0.00 12.68 0.0 11.2 1.9 24.58 125.0 3.33 48 0.76 41.47 41.72 43.90 43.87 49.13 49.28 Grand at Madison 10 9 110.000 15.10 15.10 0.84 12.68 12.68 10.6 10.6 1.9 24.58 0.00 2.95 48 -0.65 41.72 41.01 43.90 44.07 49.28 50.11 Grand e/of Madiso 11 7 5.000 1.20 1.20 0.84 1.01 1.01 6.3 6.3 2.7 2.75 4.70 3.65 18 0.20 44.35 44.36 44.98 45.06 48.17 47.92 Madison s/of Gran 12 1 15.000 2.50 2.50 0.84 2.10 2.10 7.0 7.0 2.5 5.34 38.92 3.98 18 13.73 35.58 37.64 37.65 38.52 40.96 41.37 Grand Ave at APN Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 2-Year Event I Number of lines: 12 Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Intensity= 9.16/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Retum period= 2 Yrs. ; Total flows limited to inlet captured flows. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extens1on .ro.066 • Inlet Report Page 1 Une Inlet ID Q= Q Q Q June Curb Inlet Grate Inlet Gutter Inlet Byp No CIA carry capt byp type line Ht L area L w So w Sw Sx n Depth Spread Depth Spread Depr No (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in) (ft) (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ftlft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (in) 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 2 Basin 2 -Inlet 507 5.88 1.15 7.03 0.00 Curb 6.0 15.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.42 16.12 0.63 14.93 4.0 12 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 4 Basin 3 -Inlet on R 2.56 0.00 2.56 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.37 13.68 0.61 13.68 4.0 Off 5 Basin 4 -Inlet at 64 4.06 0.00 2.91 1.15 Curb 6.0 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.31 10.72 0.51 8.78 4.0 2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 7 Basin 5 -Inlet Cha 2.39 0.11 2.50 0.00 Curb 6.0 18.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.23 6.38 0.46 6.38 4.0 Off 8 Basin 6 -Inlet Cha 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.00 Curb 6.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.005 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.20 4.98 0.31 1.30 4.0 7 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MH 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 10 Basin 8 -Inlet 725 24.69 0.00 24.58 0.11 Curb 6.0 34.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.010 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.013 0.54 21.92 0.76 21.13 4.0 7 11 Basin 7 -Flow fro 2.75 0.00 2.75 0.00 Hdwl 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 Off 12 Basin 1 -Inlet at 29 5.34 0.00 5.34 0.00 Curb 6.0 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sag 1.50 0.087 0.020 0.000 0.44 16.93 0.67 16.93 4.0 Off Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 2~Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 NOTES: Inlet N-Values = 0.016; Intensity= 9.16/ (Inlet time+ 0.10) "0.65; Return period = 2 Yrs. ; • Indicates Known Q added. All curb inlets are Horiz throat. Hydraflow Storm Sewers ExtenSion Y6.066 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ftls) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 48 48.23 33.52 37.52 4.00 12.56 3.84 0.23 37.75 0.113 5.000 33.58 37.52 3.94 12.53 3.85 0.23 37.75 0.102 0.108 0.005 0.54 0.12 2 48 42.89 33.58 37.65 4.00 12.56 3.41 0.18 37.83 0.089 167.00 34.09 37.77 3.68 12.10 3.55 0.20 37.97 0.077 0.083 0.139 0.50 0.10 3 48 35.86 34.09 37.87 3.78 12.29 2.92 0.13 38.00 n/a 308.0~ 37.73 39.50j 1.77** 5.37 6.68 0.69 40.19i n/a n/a nla 1.00 nla 4 15 2.56 39.73 40.42 0.69 0.69 3.69 0.21 40.63 nla 40.000 42.58 43.22j 0.64** 0.63 4.05 0.25 43.47i n/a n/a nla 1.00 nla 5 48 33.30 37.73 40.42 2.69 8.98 3.71 0.21 40.63 nla 115.00 40.25 41.96j 1.71** 5.11 6.51 0.66 42.62i nla nla nla 0.50 nla 6 48 30.39 40.25 42.82 2.57 8.52 3.57 0.20 43.02 nla 235.00 41.47 43.10j 1.63** 4.81 6.31 0.62 43.72i nla nla nla 0.59 nla 7 24 5.81 43.05 43.90 0.85* 1.28 4.54 0.32 44.22 nla 37.000 43.35 44.20 o.85** 1.28 4.54 0.32 44.52i nla nla nla 1.30 nla 8 18 0.57 44.35 44.64 0.29* 0.24 2.40 0.09 44.73 nla 38.000 46.00 46.29 0.29** 0.24 2.40 0.09 46.38i nla nla nla 1.00 nla 9 48 24.58 41.47 43.90 2.43 7.98 3.08 0.15 44.04 0.063 33.000 41.72 43.87 2.15 6.88 3.57 0.20 44.07 0.092 0.077 0.026 0.15 0.03 10 48 24.58 41.72 43.90 2.18 7.00 3.51 0.19 44.09 0.088 110.00 41.01 44.07 3.06 10.32 2.38 0.09 44.16 0.034 0.061 0.067 1.00 0.09 11 18 2.75 44.35 44.98 0.63* 0.71 3.88 0.23 45.22 n/a 5.000 44.36 45.06 0.70 0.80 3.42 0.18 45.24i nla nla -0.161 1.00 nla 12 18 5.34 35.58 37.65 1.50 1.77 3.02 0.14 37.79 n/a 15.000 37.64 38.52j o.88** 1.08 4.94 0.38 38.90i nla nla n/a 1.00 n/a Project File: Grand Ave Prop.stm I 2-Year Event I I Number of lines: 12 I Run Date: 03-07-2013 Notes: • Critical depth assumed.; •• Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension v6.066 • . ' . .. APPENDIX F -Hydraflow Hydrographs .. t' • 1 Watershed Mode I Schematic Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2009 by Autodesk, Inc. v6.066 1 ;f/9 :' t:··l . ·' 5 }9 :'. ':··.! . ·' Project: Grand SCS Distribution.gpw I Thursday, Mar 7, 2013 . ( . ... Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2009 by Autodesk, Inc. 116.066 Hyd. No. 1 Area to Grand Ave (SD Rational Hydrograph) Hydrograph type = Manual Storm frequency = 1 00 yrs Time interval = 10 min Hydrograph Discharge Table Time --Outflow (hrs cfs) 0.17 3.110 0.33 3.290 0.50 3.360 0.67 3.510 0.83 3.580 1.00 3.760 1.17 3.850 1.33 4.060 1.50 4.180 1.67 4.330 1.83 4.580 2.00 4.910 2.17 5.100 2.33 5.540 2.50 5.810 2.67 6.340 2.83 6.830 3.00 7.830 3.17 8.490 3.33 10.37 3.50 11.82 3.67 17.35 3.83 24.44 4.00 87.61 << 4.17 13.91 4.33 9.310 4.50 7.280 4.67 6.100 4.83 5.310 5.00 4.740 5.17 4.300 5.33 3.950 5.50 3.670 5.67 3.430 5.83 3.170 ... End Peak discharge Time to peak Hyd. volume 2 Thursday, Mar 7, 2013 = 87.61 cfs = 4.00 hrs = 185,532 cuft (Printed values>= 1.00% ofQp.) Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2009 by Autodesk, Inc. ~.066 Hyd. No. 2 Bioret. Out SUSMP Hydrograph type Storm frequency Time interval = Reservoir Peak discharge = 1 00 yrs Time to peak = 10 min Hyd. volume Inflow hyd. No. Max. Elevation = 1 -Area to Grand Ave (SD Ratiorile~gmph~ = 101.46 ft Max. Storage Storage Indication method used. Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation ClvA Clv 8 ClvC PfRsr WrA WrB WrC (hrs) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 3.33 10.37 101.04 1.180 3.50 11.82 101.11 6.457 3.67 17.35 101.17 11.90 3.83 24.44 101.23 18.64 4.00 87.61 « 101.46 « 51.39 4.17 13.91 101.45 50.79 4.33 9.310 101.22 16.76 4.50 7.280 101.16 10.57 4.67 6.100 101.13 7.955 4.83 5.310 101.12 6.519 5.00 4.740 101.10 5.605 5.17 4.300 101.10 4.955 5.33 3.950 101.09 4.482 5.50 3.670 101.08 4.102 5.67 3.430 101.08 3.790 5.83 3.170 101.08 3.530 6.00 0.000 101.06 2.523 6.17 0.000 101.04 1.363 6.33 0.000 101.03 0.826 6.50 0.000 101.02 0.528 ... End 3 Thursday, Mar 7, 2013 = 51.39 cfs = 4.00 hrs = 129,910 cuft = Bioret. SUSMP = 81,821 cuft (Printed values>= 1.00% ofQp.) WrD Exfil Outflow cfs cfs cfs 1.180 6.457 11.90 18.64 51.39 « 50.79 16.76 10.57 7.955 6.519 5.605 4.956 4.481 4.102 3.790 3.529 2.524 1.363 0.826 0.528 1 ' • • Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2009 by Autodesk, Inc. \16.066 Hyd. No. 5 Area to Grand Ave (SD Rational Hydrograph) Hydrograph type = Manual Storm frequency = 1 00 yrs Time interval = 10 min Hydrograph Discharge Table Time --Outflow (hrs cfs) 0.17 3.110 0.33 3.290 0.50 3.360 0.67 3.510 0.83 3.580 1.00 3.760 1.17 3.850 1.33 4.060 1.50 4.180 1.67 4.330 1.83 4.580 2.00 4.910 2.17 5.100 2.33 5.540 2.50 5.810 2.67 6.340 2.83 6.830 3.00 7.830 3.17 8.490 3.33 10.37 3.50 11.82 3.67 17.35 3.83 24.44 4.00 87.61 « 4.17 13.91 4.33 9.310 4.50 7.280 4.67 6.100 4.83 5.310 5.00 4.740 5.17 4.300 5.33 3.950 5.50 3.670 5.67 3.430 5.83 3.170 ... End Peak discharge Time to peak Hyd. volume 4 Thursday, Mar 7, 2013 = 87.61 cfs = 4.00 hrs = 185,532 cuft ( Printed values >= 1.00% of Qp.) Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2009 by Autodesk, Inc. 116.066 Hyd. No. 6 Bioret Out 1/2 SUSMP Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge Storm frequency = 1 00 yrs Time to peak Time interval = 10 min Hyd. volume Inflow hyd. No. = 5-Area to Grand Ave (SD Ratiorltle~gmph~ Max. Elevation = 1 01 .44 ft Max. Storage Storage Indication method used. Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation ClvA Clv B ClvC PfRsr WrA WrB WrC (hrs) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 2.17 5.100 101.04 1.584 2.33 5.540 101.08 5.104 2.50 5.810 101.08 5.697 2.67 6.340 101.09 6.094 2.83 6.830 101.09 6.610 3.00 7.830 101.10 7.387 3.17 8.490 101.11 8.230 3.33 10.37 101.12 9.571 3.50 11.82 101.13 11.31 3.67 17.35 101.16 15.17 3.83 24.44 101.21 22.24 4.00 87.61 << 101.44 « 68.19 4.17 13.91 101.33 43.82 4.33 9.310 101.07 3.895 4.50 7.280 101.11 8.520 4.67 6.100 101.09 6.534 4.83 5.310 101.08 5.662 5.00 4.740 101.08 5.005 5.17 4.300 101.07 4.518 5.33 3.950 101.07 4.123 5.50 3.670 101.06 3.812 5.67 3.430 101.06 3.564 5.83 3.170 101.06 3.314 6.00 0.000 101.04 1.751 ... End 5 Thursday, Mar 7, 2013 = 68.19 cfs = 4.00 hrs = 157,841 cuft = Bioret. 1 /2 SUSM = 40,290 cuft ( Printed values >= 1.00% of Qp.) WrD Exfil Outflow cfs cfs cfs 1.584 5.104 5.697 6.095 6.610 7.388 8.230 9.571 11.31 15.17 22.24 II • • t, 68.19 « 43.82 3.895 8.520 6.534 5.662 5.005 4.518 4.123 3.812 3.564 3.314 1.751 d) 0tr t \901)---tc', I I ~-o I o (t~ CITY OF ~CARLSBAD FILE COPY Memorandum July 29, 2013 To: Sherri Howard, Associate Engineer From:?.D• Pam Drew, Associate Planner Via ~Dave de Cordova, Principal Planner . Re: EA 13-03-NORTHWEST QUADRANT STORM DRAIN PROGRAM-GRAND AVENUE Thank you for submitting an Early Assessment to install and repair/replace the storm drain pipe and appurtenances at Grand Avenue, which starts approximately 150 feet east of the intersection with Madison Street and connects to the twin 48 inch pipes at the State Street alley. Per RBF Consulting, in their Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, dated March 8, 2013, the piping is undersized which results in flooding in this area. No new impervious surface is proposed with this project. The increased pipe will not result in an enlargement or expansion of the stormwater capacity in this area. The proposed project includes the following pipe and appurtenances: • lnstall850 lineal feet of 48-inch reinforced concrete storm drain pipe • Install 280 lineal feet of 36-inch reinforced concrete storm drain pipe • Install 80 lineal feet of 18-inch reinforced concrete storm drain pipe • Install five (5) curb inlets • Install six (6) storm drain clean outs • Resurface trench areas • Remove and replace 200 square feet of sidewalk • Relocate potable water system including water main and fire hydrant • Install bio-retention cells • Remove and replace approximately nine trees In response to your application, the Planning Division has prepared this comment letter. Please note that the purpose of an Early Assessment is to provide you with direction and comments on the overall concept of your project. This Early Assessment does not represent an in-depth analysis of your project. It is intended to give you feedback on critical issues based upon the information provided in your submittal. This review is based upon the plans, policies, and standards in effect as of the date of this review. Please be aware that at the time of a formal application submittal. new plans. policies. and standards may be in effect and additional issues of concern may be raised through a more specific and detailed review. Planning: General 1. The project will not need any permits from Planning; however, the project must comply with C.M.C. Chapter 8.48-Noise, which regulates permitted hours for construction. Community & Economic Development 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 I 760-602-8560 fax EA 13-03 :-NORTHWEST QUA.NT STORM DRAIN PROGRAM-GRAND INUE Jt.ly~2~. ',2bn~ '"' 1 , Pa e 2 2. The project is exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines Section 15302(c), concerning replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity. 3. Street trees are an important feature in the Village area and should be protected in place as much as possible. 4. Please coordinate construction activities with the city's consultant Urban Place. Land Development Engineering: 5. Separate comments were previously submitted to you. If you would like to schedule a meeting to discuss this letter with your staff planner, please contact Pam Drew, Associate Planner at ext. 4644, or your staff engineer, Glen Van Peski, Engineering Manager at ext. 2783. DD:PD:bd c: Don Neu, City Planner Bill Plummer, Engineering Manager Scott Donnell, Senior Planner File Copy Data Entry DATE: PROJECT NO(S): PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: TO: JUNE 17, 2013 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO EA 13~03 REVIEW NO: -=~~~------------------------------~ 6608 NW QUADRANT DRAIN PROGRAM GRAND AVENUE CITY OF CARLSBAD/BILL PLUMMER 1 [81 Land Development Engineering 0 Public Works {Storm Drain)-Clayton Dobbs 0 Public Works (Wastewater)-Don Wasko D Public Works (Water)-Jase Warner 0 Police Department-J. Sa sway 0 Fire Department -Greg Ryan 0 Building Division-Will Foss D Water/Sewer District 0 Parks & Recreation (Parks/Trails)-Liz Ketabian 0 Parks & Recreation (Trees & Medians)-Mike Bliss 0 Public Works Department (Streets)-Nick Roque D Public Works Department (Traffic) -John Kim 0 Public Works Department (Design}-Bill Plummer *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DIVISION 0 Landscape Plancheck Consultant-PELA 0 School District 0 North County Transit District-Planning Dept. D Sempra Energy-Land Management 0 Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5} Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Division at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 7/5/13. If you have "No Comments," please so state. If you determine that there are items that need to be submitted to deem the application "complete" for processing, please immediately contact the applicant and/or their representatives (via phone or e-mail) to let them know. Thank you COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 03/13 CONSULTING A~Company RBF Consulting 5050 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92008 To: Sherri Howard City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 June 3, 2013 Carlsbad NW Quadrant-Grand Avenue-30% Submittal Discussion Items General The plans show that several existing traffic loops will be impacted by the proposed improvements. It is our understanding that some of the signals (Roosevelt Street for example) have video detection and no longer require the existing traffic loops. Please confirm which of the loops are currently in use so that we can clarify on the plans which loops require replacement. There are several apparent discrepancies between the linework in the topo file from the City and the utility mark-outs, particularly as it relates to water lines and water valves. Additional potholes are recommended in order to more accurately identify the horizontal location of the water line (Round 2 pothole exhibit forthcoming). Please let us know exactly which water valve and service relocations the City would like us to show on our plans. Please confirm that the City would prefer to abandon the existing storm drain system (as opposed to utilizing it in addition to the proposed improvements). We previously provided an analysis and recommendation that the existing system be abandoned since utilizing it would not result in any cost savings. Sheet 4 After a detailed analysis of the pothole information, it is clear that the current proposed alignment will require some significant utility relocations as well as a new junction structure. There is not sufficient room between the existing 10" ACP water and the electric vault for the proposed pipe. The plans currently call for the relocation of the water with the assumption that the pipe will be built as close to the electric vault as possible to minimize the length of the water relocation. An additional alternative alignment has also been shown on the plan for the City's consideration. The newly suggested alternative alignment would cross over to the north side of Grand Avenue through the State Street intersection. The alternative system would connect to the existing system at the existing junction structure. The intent would be to utilize the existing junction structure. This alternative alignment would have the added benefit of avoiding the numerous electric lines near the connection point on the south side of the street. Relocation of a portion of the 10" ACP water would still be required with the alternative alignment, but the limits of the relocation would be less than the original proposed alignment. However, this alternative has a possible conflict with the abandoned 36" interceptor sewer (see below for additional discussion). Additional information is needed regarding the tie-ins of the existing 18" RCP (from the east) and 15" RCP (from the west) to the existing dual48" RCP. The topo file we received from the City makes note of an abandoned 36" interceptor sewer running down the north side of Grand Avenue. We have not been able to find any as-builts for the system on the City website. Additional potholes are recommended, particularly if the City is interested in the alternative alignment discussed above (which crosses over to the north side of Grand Avenue). SheetS There are several gas laterals near station 11+40 that were not included in the first round of potholes. The profile shows these with assumed depths based on the pothole information for similar utilities. We recommend that these be included in the next round of potholes. At each of the pop-outs near the intersections with Roosevelt Street and Madison Street, the distance between the existing gutter and the proposed pipe is reduced to only about 1-2'. In order to construct the pipe in that location, the curb and gutter will likely need to be removed and replaced (approx. STA 8+10 to 8+50, 9+10 to 9+70, 11+70 to 12+20, and 12+90 to 13+50). Removal and replacement in those isolated locations is considered preferable over the alternative, which would be to move the proposed pipe further from the existing gutter and replace significant portions of the existing 10" water main. Sheet 6 Although the majority of the utility relocations are near the downstream end of the proposed system, there is one location on Sheet 6 where the proposed storm drain pipe crosses between an existing 8" VCP sewer and an existing 12" PVC water. There is not sufficient room for the 36" pipe (with a typical RCP thickness) between the services. The plans call for the relocation of the water line. Summary of Action Items The following is a summary of action items. We would be happy to discuss these in more detail at your convenience. City of Carlsbad (to be completed in conjunction with 30% submittal review by 6/24) • Identify water valves and services for relocation • Identify which traffic loops are still active and require replacement • Confirm the abandonment of the existing storm drain system • Determine if the newly suggested alternative alignment is preferable • Provide any additional information regarding the location of the abandoned 36" interceptor sewer RBF (to be completed by 6/10) • Provide exhibit with suggest locations for 2nd round of potholing • CONSULTING Carlsbad Northwest Quadrant Drainage Improvements CITY OF CARLSBAD 30% Cost Estimate -Grand Avenue June 3, 2013 General Grand Avenue Total TBD $674,143 $674,143 5050 Avenida Encinas. Suite 260, Carlsbad, California 92008 #760.476.9193 # FAX 760.476.9198 Offices located throughout California, Arizona Nevada • www.RBF.com RBF JN: 133979 1 of 3 H:\PDATA\133979\Calcs\Cost Estimates\Grand Ave 30% Cost Estimate.xls General ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 1 Mobilization 1 2 Trench dewatering (project-wide) 1 3 Storm Drain Pollution Control 1 4 Potholing and Utility Coordination 1 Subtotal • UNit UNITS PRICE LS TBD LS TBD LS TBD LS TBD RBF JN: 133979 2 of3 AMOUNT TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Grand Avenue ITEM NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 UNIT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS PRICE 48" RCP Storm Drain Pipe 850 LF $230.00 36" RCP Storm Drain Pipe 280 LF $188.50 18" RCP Storm Drain Pipe 80 LF $123.50 Type B Curb Inlet (SDRSD D-2) 4 EA $6,160.00 Type A Curb Inlet (SDRSD D-2) 1 EA $6,160.00 Type 85 Storm Drain Cleanout (SDRSD D-9) 4 EA $7,200.00 Type A4 Storm Drain Cleanout (SDRSD D-9) 1 EA $6,368.00 Trench Resurfacing, Per SDG-107&108 1,200 LF $41.25 Trench Shoring (up to 1 0') 1,200 LF $14.34 Modified Type B Cleanout 1 EA $14,400.00 Demo Existing Curb & Gutter 400 LF $3.30 6" Curb & Gutter (SDRSD G-2) 400 LF $22.00 Sidewalk Removal and Disposal 175 SF $2.01 Sidewalk 175 SF $8.00 Tree Protection/Relocation 15 EA $300.00 Connect to Existing Storm Drain 4 EA $320.00 Sign Relocation 1 EA $500.00 Utility Relocation -Water Main (4) 1 EA $50,000.00 Replace Signing and Striping 1 LS $1,000.00 Fire Hydrant Relocation 1 EA $3,190.00 Demo and Remove SD Inlet 4 EA $4,000.00 Replace Traffic Detector Loop 3 EA $544.50 Allowance for Construction of Bioretention Cells 600 SF $45.00 Demo and Remove Existing SD Pipe 60 LF $50.00 Demo and Remove Existing SD Manhole 1 EA $3,500.00 Replace Decorative Pavers 140 LF $30.00 Traffic Control 1 LS $53,300.00 Subtotal 15% Contingency Estimated Total Bid 5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260, Cartsbad, California 92008 #760.476.9193 # FAX 760.476.9198 Offices located throughout California, Arizona Nevada • www.RBF.com AMOUNT $195,500.00 $52,780.00 $9,880.00 $24,640.00 $6,160.00 $28,800.00 $6,368.00 $49,500.00 $17,208.00 $14,400.00 $1,320.00 $8,800.00 $351.75 $1,400.00 $4,500.00 $1,280.00 $500.00 $50,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,190.00 $16,000.00 $1,633.50 $27,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,500.00 $4,200.00 $53,300.00 $586,211.25 $87,931.69 $674,142.94 H:IPDATA\133979\Calcs\Cost Estimates\Grand Ave 30% Cost Estimate.xls Notes and Assumptions 1) Water valves are assumed funded through other financial mechanism RBF JN: 133979 3 of3 2) No additional surface improvements beyond trench restoration and curb reconstruction (i.e. general surface overlay) is included 3) Relocation of Gas, Telephone, or other Dry Utilities assumed to be the financial responsibility of others 5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260, Carlsbad, California 92008 #760.476.9193 # FAX 760.476.9198 Offices located throughout California, Arizona Nevada • www.RBF.com H:\PDATA\133979\Calcs\Cost Estimates\Grand Ave 30% Cost Estimate.xls PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FORM FOR EARLY ASSESSMENT BY THE SPECIAL PROJECTS TEAM PROJECT PROPONENT/DEPT CONTACT SIGNATURE: DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SIGNATU Please type your responses in the boxes provided below. The form may be expanded to accommodate as much . £ . h "d m ormation as you c oose to provt e. PROJECT NAME/TITLE: 6608 NORTHWEST QUADRANT STORM DRAIN PROGRAM-GRAND A VENUE Have you submitted any previous early assessment applications for this project with Planning staff? If so, please attach a copy of the original request and the Planning Department's response. No Is the project part of an approved CIP budget or a future CIP budget? If so, please provide the CIP Project#. Yes-6608 List any previous and/or anticipated future Planning Commission or City Council actions (e.g., permit approvals, activity authorizations, etc.) related to this project. Authorization to Bid and Award of Contract List any previously certified environmental documents (e.g., EIRs, Negative Declarations). Not for this project List any technical studies that have been prepared or that you anticipate will be prepared (e.g., biology, archeology, traffic, noise, etc.). Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis Is the project on City property? If not, has property owner authorization or an easement been secured? Yes, it is within City public right ofway Identify the project location. Include specific parcel numbers if possible. Grand avenue between State Street Alley and Jefferson Street within the public street right of way for Grand Avenue Identify the project schedule. List critical and desired milestones including dates in the development review and construction process (e.g., public hearing dates, grant application submittal deadlines, public workshops, construction phasing, etc.). February 2012 -Initiate project design RECEIVED November 2013-Finalize project design JUN 1 ~ 7"~1 December 2013 -Authorization to Bid Project to City Council December to March 2014-Bid Project CITY OF CARLSBAD April 2014-Award project PLANNING DIV'lStON May 2014-NTP for project construction June 2014 to October 2014-Project Construction Early Assessment For City Projects-Revised 1/3/11 Page 2 of3 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL -Describe the project in as much detail as possible. Use as much space as needed. Attach additional sheets (drawings, etc.) if necessary. Be sure to identify, if applicable, estimated quantities of grading (including import/export), construction staging areas on and offsite, areas of sensitive vegetation, unique construction technologies, proposed facility technologies and byproducts, and any public art component. If preliminary or conceptual plans or exhibits are available, please include two sets with this transmittal. Grand Avenue has flooded historically during storm events. Some of the flooding blocks driveways and sidewalks and could flood buildings. This project will improve the drainage in the general Grand Avenue area by conveying storm water in an appropriately sized pipeline. The existing pipeline is undersized. It is also located under the sidewalk and under landscape planters. Removing and replacing the existing storm drain pipeline in the same location is not feasible due to utility conflicts. The result of the hydrology and hydraulics report indicated that the pipeline needs to be 48-inch diameter. The existing undersized pipeline is 15-inch diameter. The new pipeline will be constructed using open trench construction techniques. The project includes the construction of the following improvements: • 850 linear feet of 48-inch reinforced concrete storm drain pipeline • 280 lineal feet of 36-inch reinforced concrete storm drain pipeline • 80 lineal feet of 18-inch reinforced concrete storm drain pipeline • 5 curb inlets • 6 storm drain clean outs • Trench resurfacing both asphaltic cement and pavers • 200 square feet of sidewalk removal and replacement • Potable water system relocations including water main and fire hydrant • Installation ofbioretention cells Early Assessment For City Projects-Revised 1/3111 Page 3 of3