The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 15-01; Cascada Verde; Preliminary Drainage Report; 2015-11-09.... Q~(L l PRELIMINARY '·~·"'··-···-"·- DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CASCADA VERDE (CT 15-01, PUD 15-03, SDP 15-02, HDP 15-02) November 9, 2015 ChlllffiffiDJS5CD088JDJQS5 Civil Engineering o Hydrology o Hydraulics o Sedimentation P.O. Box 9496 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 (858) 692-0760 j j j j j j j j j j j j j j J j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ I Hydrologic Analyses .......................................................................................................................... 2 Hydraulic Analyses ............................................................................................................................ 3 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 8 APPENDICES A. 100-Year Rational Method and Detention Analyses and Supporting Data B. Downstream Hydraulic Analyses C. On-Site HEC-RAS Analysis D. Submerged Outlet Analyses MAP POCKET Existing and Proposed Condition Rational Method Work Maps Preliminary Grading Plan As-built Drawing 167-7, Sheets 4 and 14 San Marcos Creek HEC-RAS Work Map On-Site HEC-RAS Work Map INTRODUCTION The Cascada Verde project is a proposed residential development that will consist of 35 attached multi-family residences (townhomes) along with associated driveways, sidewalks, walkways, landscaping, and drainage facilities. The development will be constructed within an undeveloped 3.68 acre parcel (Assessor's Parcel Number 215-240-36) along the north side of Alicante Road between Altisma Way and Altiva Place (see Vicnity Map). CITY Of PROJECT LOCA170N f\ CITY Of VISTA \. 1ROA0 Vicinity Map Under pre-project conditions, the site is in a natural state and covered with vegetation ranging from grasses and weeds to brush and large trees. An unnamed natural drainage course flows in a southerly direction through the middle of the site. The drainage course contains dense, mature vegetation. The drainage course conveys storm runoff from the site and its upstream tributary area to an existing 72-inch culvert under Alicante Road. The culvert discharges into a concrete- lined trapezoidal channel that flows southerly through the La Costa Resort & Spa's South (golf) Course to a confluence with San Marcos Creek. San Marcos Creek continues westerly through the golf course and ultimately discharges into Batiquitos Lagoon. Under post-project conditions, the multi-family buildings, driveways, parking, and recreation areas will be developed on both sides of the unnamed natural drainage course. A portion of the on-site drainage course will be channelized to allow development to occur immediately east and west of the channel. Retaining walls will be used along both channel banks and a vehicular crossing of the drainage course is proposed within the upstream portion of the site. Access entrances will be constructed along Altisma Way and Altiva Place. The 72-inch culvert under Alicante Road will be replaced with a larger culvert (up to 96-inch diameter) to lower the 100- year water surface elevations within the site. Due to limited space at the downstream end of the culvert, an option to retain the 72-inch culvert and construct a parallel culvert is not feasible. This report contains preliminary drainage analyses for Hofman Planning and Engineering's (Hofman) preliminary grading plans. The analyses determined the entitlement-level pre-and post-development 100-year flow rates, modeled the proposed channelization of the unnamed natural drainage course through the site, and analyzed downstream hydraulic conditions. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSES Hydrologic analyses were performed to determine the 100-year flow rates under pre-(existing) and post-project (proposed) conditions. The County of San Diego's 2003 Hydrology Manual rational method procedure was used for the 1 00-year hydrologic analyses. The rational method input parameters are summarized below and the supporting data is included in Appendix A: • Precipitation: The 100-year, 6-and 24-hour precipitation values are 2.8 and 4.9 inches, respectively. • Drainage areas: The drainage basins were delineated from the base topography and the preliminary grading plan by Hofman. A site investigation was performed to verify the pre- project delineations. See the Rational Method Work Map exhibits in the map pocket for the basin boundaries, rational method node numbers, and basin areas. The analyses in this report assume that Hofman will design drainage facilties during final engineering that convey off- site runoff through the site without commingling with the project runoff. • Hydrologic soil groups: The hydrologic soil groups were determined from the Natural Resources Conservation Service's (NRCS) Web Soil Survey. The soil group in the study area is entirely type D. • Runoff coefficients: The site is currently undeveloped and supports natural ground cover. Land uses for the undeveloped and natural areas were based on the undisturbed natural terrain category. The project will create 35 attached multi-family residential units on the 3.68 acre site. The land uses for proposed conditions were based on the estimated percent impervious within each drainage subarea • Flow lengths and elevations: The flow lengths and elevations were obtained from the base topography and preliminary grading plan. 2 The existing and proposed condition rational method results are included in Appendix A and summarized in Table 1. The overall results are given for the major drainage basins on the east and west sides of the drainage course. The existing condition drainage areas were set equal to the proposed condition drainage areas to allow comparison of the results. The results show that the project flows are relatively small, so can be conveyed by typical drainage facilities (curb and gutter, pipes, etc.). In addition, the project will cause a small increase in the 100-year flow rates (1.8 cfs maximum increase). The preliminary Storm Water Management Plan states that bioretention basins will serve the east and west portions of the site. The bioretention basins will provide some detention of the proposed condition 100-year flows. Since the flow increases are small and detention will occur, the off-site flow increases will be minimal and additional mitigation is not proposed. Drainage Drainage Existing Condition Proposed Condition Flow Increase, Basin Area, ac 100-Year Flow, cfs 100-Year Flow, cfs cfs East 0.97 2.5 3.7 1.2 West 1.65 4.3 6.5 2.2 Table 1. Summary of 100-Year Rational Method Results HYDRAULIC ANALYSES Downstream Analyses The unnamed drainage course within the site flows in a southerly direction and connects to an existing 72-inch RCP culvert under Alicante Road at the southerly end of the site (see as-built drawing 167-7 sheet 4 in the map pocket). The culvert discharges on the south side of Alicante Road into a concrete-lined trapezoidal channel within the La Costa South Course (see as-built drawing 167-7 sheet 14). The channel continues in a southwesterly to southerly direction and ultimately confluences with the San Marcos Creek main channel within the South Course. The July 3, 2008, Final Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan, by Brown and Caldwell indicates that the 1 00-year flow rate in the unnamed drainage course is 628 cfs (see excerpts in Appendix B). The existing 72-inch RCP culvert cannot convey this entire 1 00-year flow rate and water will overtop Alicante Road. The project proposes to increase the 72-inch RCP to up to a 96-inch RCP. This provides a benefit by reducing the potential for water overtopping Alicante Road and will help the project by lowering the on-site 1 00-year water surface elevations. Increasing the culvert can alter the downstream hydraulics. Consequently, the downstream hydraulic conditions were analyzed to assess the changes. As mentioned above, the flow out of the 72-inch pipe enters an existing concrete-lined trapezoidal channel. As-built drawing 167-7 sheet 14 shows that the upper end of the channel has a 3-foot bottom width, 1.5:1 side slopes, and a 5.7-foot depth. The City of Carlbad's city-wide 2-foot contour interval topographic mapping indicates that the remainder of the channel has similar dimensions although the depth is in the 4.5-foot range in some areas. The topographic mapping indicates that the minimum longitudinal channel slope is approximatley 0.45 percent. A normal depth analysis was performed for the channel based on the 100-year flow rate of 628 cfs, a 3-foot bottom width, 3 1.5:1 side slopes, and 0.45 percent longitudinal slope. The results are included in Appendix B and show that the normal depth of flow is 4.8 feet. Therefore, the entire 1 00-year (undetained) flow tributary to the site can be conveyed in portions of the channel. The 1 00-year flow can overtop other portions of the channel by a few tenths of a foot. However, the overtopping flow will not impact adjacent residential developments, which are several feet higher than the channel. The overtopping flow will merely spread over the adjacent golf course area, which is already mostly within the San Marcos Creek floodplain. It should be noted that the channel enters an existing 48-inch RCP in the golf course just before the confluence with the San Marcos Creek main channel. The 48-inch RCP does not have capacity for the 628 cfs, so the 48-inch RCP will cause the higher range of flows to spill out of the channel into the golf course under current conditions. A HEC-RAS analysis was performed to assess the changes within San Marcos Creek associated with increasing the 72-inch culvert. The HEC-RAS input parameters are as follows. The HEC- RAS cross-sections were based on the City's 2-foot contour interval mapping. The cross-sections extend both upstream and downstream of the trapezoidal channel and are shown on the HEC- RAS Work Map in the map pocket. Since the study reach is within a golf course, the roughness coefficients were assumed to be in the range of 0.035 to 0.040. FEMA's May 16, 2012, Flood Insurance Study, indicates that the 1 00-year flow rate in San Marcos Creek at Lake San Marcos is 15,700 cfs (see Appendix B). This flow rate was used in the analysis. Cross-100-Year Water Surface Elevation, ft Section Pre-Project Post-Projece Difference 1 17.66 17.69 0.03 2 18.16 18.19 0.03 3 18.94 18.97 0.03 4 19.35 19.38 0.03 5 19.49 19.52 0.03 6 20.15 20.18 0.03 7 21.75 21.79 0.04 8 23.54 23.57 0.03 9 23.82 23.86 0.04 10 24.09 24.12 0.03 11 24.14 24.18 0.04 12 24.48 24.53 0.05 13 24.77 24.81 0.04 14 25.63 25.64 0.01 1The post-project results reflect an increase in the 100-year flow rate of 241 cfs below the confluence. Table 2. Summary of San Marcos Creek Hydraulics Increasing the 72-inch culvert to a 96-inch culvert will allow slightly more flow towards San Marcos Creek. In order to assess the increase, a WSPGW analysis was performed for the 4 proposed 96-inch RCP. The analysis is included in Appendix Band shows that the 100-year flow of 628 cfs results in an upstream hydraulic grade line elevation of 39.0 feet. An additional WSGPW showed that the current 72-inch RCP will convey 397 cfs with the same upstream hydraulic grade line. Therefore, the increase in flow associated with the 96-inch RCP is 241 cfs (628 -397 = 241). To model the project impacts, the HEC-RAS analysis assumed that the 15,700 cfs was increased by 241 cfs (below the confluence) to 15,941 cfs. The pre-and post- project results are summarized in Table 2 and included in Appendix B. Table 2 shows that the differences in the 1 00-year water surface elevations are minimal. The majority of the increases of between 0.03 to 0.04 feet and maximum of up to 0.05 feet (0.6 inches) will not have an impact on the golf course and are within the accuracy limits of the modeling. The differences will be even less if the timing differences in the unnamed natural drainage course and San Marcos Creek are considered. On-Site Analysis The project encroaches on a portion of the unnamed natural drainage course within the site. A proposed condition HEC-RAS analysis was performed to analyze the proposed channelization within the project. The HEC-RAS analysis was based on Hofman's preliminary grading plan (see map pocket for the grading plan dated May 26, 20 15) and the 1 00-year flow of 628 cfs. The downstream starting water surface elevation is based on a WSPGW analysis with the proposed 96-inch culvert (see Appendix B). A high roughness coefficient of 0.10 was assumed in HEC- RAS in order to model a densely vegetated channel for the purposes of establishing the design water surface elevations. Hofman's plans include two drop structures to lower the 100-year flow velocities within the channelization area to avoid erosion. The first is at the downstream end of the channel grading and the second is at the upstream end of the channel grading. Riprap will be required at the drop structures to resist the higher flow velocities. The drop structures can be buried and planted, if desired. The upper drop structure will cause critical depth to occur at the drop, which will prevent upstream off-site impacts on water surface elevations. The proposed condition hydraulic analysis shows a 100-year water surface elevation at cross-section 17 of 54.47 feet, which is off-site and at the upper end of the study reach. The existing condition 1 00-year water is not higher than this elevation because the backwater at the proposed drop structure will be at critical depth. Since the stream is natural, the existing condition flow regime will be subritical, so the existing condition backwater at the future drop structure location will be higher than critical depth. Consequently, the existing building adjacent to cross-section 17 will not experience a rise in water surface elevations under proposed conditions. It should be noted that at cross-section 16 between the proposed drop structure and cross-section 17, the 1 00-year flows are contained within the existing channel, so the project will not encroach into the floodplain or increase water surface elevations at cross-section 16. Currently, double 9-foot wide by 5-foot high reinforced concrete box culverts are modeled at the Driveway D crossing of the drainage course. These can be adjusted during final engineering, as appropriate. The on-site HEC-RAS analysis is included in Appendix C and the results are 5 summarized in Table 3. Comparing the HEC-RAS results with the preliminary grading plan indicates that the entire project area is above the 100-year water surface elevations. The proposed channelization incorporates drop structures to reduce the longitudinal channel slope between the drop structures. The box culverts under Driveway D and the culvert under Alicante Road also act as drop structures. The intent is to create a longitudinal slope that is flat enough so that the 1 00-year flow velocities between the drop structures are non-erosive, i.e., so that the channel between drop structures is non-scouring. Since the drop structures will be relatively steep, the flow velocities at the structures will be erosive, so the structures will be lined with riprap. The resulting channel profile will have a stair step pattern. The non-erodible riprap (and culverts) will act as grade controls that further prevent scour of the upstream channel. A similar concept was used along Buena Vista Creek for the completed Hanson Aggregates Quarry Creek reclamation project. Creating non-erosive flow velocities between the drop structures and lining the drop structures with riprap will result in a channel that will not experience significant scour. Therefore, the adjacent retaining walls and footings do not need to be designed for excessive scour. Cross-Post-Project 100-Year Water Post-Project 100-Year section Surface Elevations, ft Flow Velocities, fps 1 39.00 1.08 2 39.01 1.80 3 39.09 1.49 4 39.13 1.49 5 39.21 1.81 6 39.27 4.25 7 40.33 9.34 8 43.57 5.46 9 45.02 6.59 10 45.87 3.69 10.5 Proposed Culverts 11 46.56 5.81 11.5 47.40 4.83 13 48.19 4.52 14 48.30 4.86 15 48.73 3.97 16 51.49 7.61 17 54.47 3.60 Table 3. Summary of On-Site Hydraulics An maintenance access ramp will provided from Alicante Road to the bottom of the natural drainage course. The ramp will be concrete, 8-feet wide, and at a 2:1 slope down the channel bank. The location and configuration of the ramp is such that it will cause minimal, if any, 6 effects on the 1 00-year water surface elevations. If minimal effects occur, they will be small enough that they essentially will have no impacts on the hydraulic design of the project. Submerged Pipe Outlets Two storm drain systems will collect and convey storm runoff from existing storm drain systems in the adjacent Altisma Way and Altiva Place -one system serves each adjacent street. These storm drain systems will convey the runoff through the project site and into the unnamed drainage course. The storm drain outlets will be at the bottom of the drainage course which is as low as elevation 30.5 feet. Table 3 indicates that the 1 00-year water surface elevation in the unnamed drainage course will be as high as approximately 39.1 feet (at cross-section 3) near the outlets. Therefore the pipe outflows can submerged by nearly 9 feet. The following discusses the impacts from the submerged outflow. The storm drain on the east side of the unnamed drainage course (Line B) will serve a storm drain system in Altiva Place. There is an existing storm drain at this location that is shown on Drawing No. 182-6 (sheet 22). The as-built indicates that the storm drain invert rises up to 46.67 feet in Altiva Place near the outlet. In addition, the existing and proposed pipe segments between the drainage course and Altiva Place are at 29.2 (existing) to 47.3 (proposed) percent slope. Since the invert in Altiva Place is several feet higher than the water surface and since the pipe is so steep (supercritical flow), the backwater from the 1 00-year water surface elevation will not impact the portion of the storm drain system in Altiva Place. The backwater will only control the lower most portion of the storm drain system, which will not cause adverse affects. In fact, since the project is reducing the 1 00-year water surface elevation in the unnamed drainage course, the future backwater will be less than the current backwater. The storm drain on the west side of the unnamed drainage course will serve a storm drain system in Altisma Way (Line A). Hydraulic analyses were performed for this proposed storm drain to assess the feasibility given a submerged outlet (see Appendix D). The storm drain plan and profile from Hofman's entitlement drawings were entered into WSPGW. The downstream backwater was set at 39.0 feet. An analysis was performed to determine the maximum flow in the proposed storm drain before the hydraulic grade line (HGL) rises above a manhole. The results show that 26 cfs can be conveyed before the HGL rises above the manhole at station 112+00. Based on a review of the City's Master Drainage Plan, the drainage area tributary to this storm drain is estimated to be in the range of 10 to 15 acres (to be confirmed during final engineering), which will likely generate around 26 cfs. Another WSPGW was performed assuming Line A is increased from a 24-inch RCP to a 30-inch RCP. The capacity with the larger pipe is considerable higher at 46 cfs. Based on these results, the submerged storm drain pipe design is feasible. The outlets of proposed storm drain Line A and B will each contain a riprap energy dissipater. The dissipater will be within the unnamed natural drainage course. However, the dissipater will not affect the stream morphology. The flow velocities in the unnamed natural drainage course at the dissipater locations will be very low due to the backwater from the downstream Alicante Road culvert and because the drainage course broadens at these locations. The HEC-RAS results in Appendix C show that the 1 00-year flow velocities are less than 2 feet per second. This is 7 below the non-erosive threshold of 5 to 6 feet per second. Therefore, the drainage course near the outlets is not subject to erosion nor morphological changes. CONCLUSION Preliminary hydrologic and hydraulic analyses have been performed for the Cascada Verde multi-family residential project. The analyses were based on the preliminary grading plans by Hofman Planning and Engineering. The results show that the project is feasible and will not adversely impact downstream hydraulic conditions. The project will increase 100-year flow rates, but the increases will be minor and can be mitigated by the proposed bioretention basins. Increasing the size of the existing 72-inch culvert to a 96-inch culvert under Alicante Road will prevent overtopping during a 1 00-year storm and will not impact downstream residences. The culvert increase also will not have an apprciable impact on the existing golf course since it is already in the San Marcos Creek floodplain. City Reimbursement fOr Drainage Improvement The City's July 3, 2008, Final Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan, by Brown and Caldwell proposes Drainage Project DH within the on-site drainage course. This is described as an 800- foot long unlined trapezoidal channel (see excerpt in Appendix B). Since the Cascada Verde project will, in essense, be constructing the channel, the developer is seeking reimbursement for this drainage improvement. 8 APPENDIX A 100-YEAR RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSES AND SUPPORTING DATA 10.0 ..... ...... 9.0 r-.. "' ~ Directions for Application: 8.0 .... r-.. """ .... (1) From precipitation maps determine 6 hr and 24 hr amounts 7.0 ~ t'-.. ~ ""I'-""~ I' for the selected frequency. These maps are included in the t'-.. "'~iii ~ ~ .... ~ .... .. ,~'-I' EQUATION County Hydrology Manual (10, 50, and 100 yr maps included 6.0 ~ "" = 7.44 P6 D-0·645 in the Design and Procedure Manual). .. ~ '~'-I r-.. ~ (2) Adjust 6 hr precipitation (if necessary) so that it is within 5.0 ..... ~~ ~~~ I = Intensity (inlhr) ..... ..... ~ p 6 = 6-Hour Precipitation (in) the range of 45% to 65% of the 24 hr precipitation (not 4.0 t'-.. .... applicaple to Desert). r.... t'-.. ~ D = Duration (min) .... ..... ...... (3) Plot 6 hr precipitation on the right side of the chart. .. ~'-r-.. 3.0 r-.. ~ (4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the plotted lines . ..... .... (5) This line is the intensity-duration curve for the location ..... ..... I"" I" ~ ...... being analyzed. 2.0 "' .. .... ..... ~ ~ ~'-...... ~'-' ~I' Application Fonn: ..... ~'-' ~'I' ~ .... ' 1 .. (l) (a) Selected frequency ___ year .... ± ~ .... ~ ...... ~'-' ~~ 0 p :::l ~ (b) P6 = _1.&.__ in., P24 = ~ .~ = 57 %(2) ~ I' ' 1 .. ~ .... ~'I' ~~ ~ --- ~~ 24 .! .... ~~ (c) Adjusted P6<2> = ~in. g1.0 6.0 ~ ~0.9 ~~ ~ 5.5 =· (d) 1x = __ min. ·~0.8 .... !'Ill~~ 5.0 g ~0.7 1'-i"i 4.5 5' (e) I= __ in./hr. r--., I' g. 4.0 ~ 0.6 3.5.!!!. ' ~I' Note: This chart replaces the Intensity-Duration-Frequency 0.5 3.0 curves used since 1965. .... 0.4 1 .. 1' 2.5 ~'-...... P6 ~~ ~1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 ~'-..... Duration I · I T I I I I I I I I I I 2.0 5 2.63 3.95 5.27 6.59 .J--~ 9.~t{;l:P 1.86 ~.17 1~J~·81 0.3 7 2.12 3.18 4.~~~ 6.36J4._2 8.48 9.~_..!,_0.60 11.66 12.72 10 1.68 2.53 3.37 4.21 5.05 5.90 6.74 7.58 8.42 9.27 10.11 1.5 --15 1.30 1.95 2.59 3.24 3.89 4.54 5.19 5.84 6.49 7. 13 7.78 --20 1.08 1.62 2.~~~ 3.23 3.n 4.31 4.85 5.39 5.93 6.46 0.2 -25 0.93 1.40 1.87 2.33 2.80~.2~ 3.~~-4-20 ~~~ 5.1~-5.60 --30 0 83-1.24 1.66 2.07 2.49 2.90 3.32 3.73 ~ 4.~-4.98 --40 . 7 : 1.0 0.6~-1.03 1.38 ~72 2.07 2.41 2.76 3.10 3.45 3.79 ~.13 50 0.~-~ cl·" "''~"''·"~'·~ ··~-'·" ~ 3.58 --60 0.53 0.80 1.06 j 1.33 1.59 1.~i 2.12 2.39 2.65 2.92 3.18 90 0.41 0.61 0.82 ~ 1.23 1.43 1.63 1.~~ ~ 2~ -no 0.34 0.51 0.68 0.85 1.02 1.19 1.36 1.53 1.70 1 .8~-2.04 150 -0.29 0.44 0.59 ~ 0.88 J:-~ ~-~ .32 1.47 1.62 1.76 110 0.2!-~ 0.52 0.651 0.78 0.91 1.04 1.18 1.31 1.44 1.57 0.1 240 0.22 0.33 0.43 0.54 10.65 g~ 0.~~ 0.98 -J,:-~ 1.19 1.30 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 30 40 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 300 .~0_.28 ~.38 0.47 .0.56 0.66_~~~~ 0.94 1.03 1.13 Minutes Hours ---0.17 0.25 0.33 0.42 0.50 0.58 0.67 0.75 0.84 0.92 1.00 Duration FIGURE ~ i ~ . I ! I I ! l I ... • • D) • ~ II ~ N D. San Diego County Hydrology Manual Date: June 2003 Table 3-1 Section: Page: RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR URBAN AREAS Land Use I Runoff Coefficient "C" Soil T~Ee NRCS Elements Coun Elements %IMPER. A B Undisturbed Natural Terrain (Natural) Permanent Open Space 0* 0.20 0.25 Low Density Residential (LDR) Residential, 1.0 DUIA or less 10 0.27 0.32 Low Density Residential (LDR) Residential, 2.0 DU/A or less 20 0.34 0.38 Low Density Residential (LDR) Residential, 2.9 DU/A or less 25 0.38 0.41 Medium Density Residential (MDR) Residential, 4.3 DU/A or less 30 0.41 0.45 Medium Density Residential (MDR) Residential, 7.3 DU/A or less 40 0.48 0.51 Medium Density Residential (MDR) Residential, 10.9 DUI A or less 45 0.52 0.54 Medium Density Residential (MDR) Residential, 14.5 DU/A or less 50 0.55 0.58 High Density Residential (HDR) Residential, 24.0 DU/A or less 65 0.66 0.67 High Density Residential (HDR) Residential, 43.0 DUIA or less 80 0.76 0.77 Commercial!lndustrial (N. Com) Neighborhood Commercial 80 0.76 0.77 Commercialllndustrial (G. Com) General Commercial 85 0.80 0.80 Commercialllndustrial (O.P. Com) Office Professional/Commercial 90 0.83 0.84 Commercialllndustrial (Limited I.) Limited Industrial 90 0.83 0.84 Commercialllndustrial (General I.) General Industrial 95 0.87 0.87 c 0.30 0.36 0.42 0.45 0.48 0.54 0.57 0.60 0.69 0.78 0.78 0.81 0.84 0.84 0.87 3 6 of26 D 0.35 0.41 0.46 0.49 0.52 0.57 0.60 0.63 0.71 0.79 0.79 0.82 0.85 0.85 0.87 *The values associated with 0% impervious may be used for direct calculation of the runoff coefficient as described in Section 3 .1.2 (representing the pervious runoff coefficient, Cp, for the soil type), or for areas that will remain undisturbed in perpetuity. Justification must be given that the area will remain natural forever (e.g., the area is located in Cleveland National Forest). DU/ A = dwelling units per acre NRCS =National Resources Conservation Service 3-6 1-LU LU u.. 0 z -LU (.,) z ~ en Ei LU en 0:: ::::> 0 (.,) 0:: LU ~ 1\,'Yf / ; /1 ........,.. 130 (/') w 1-:::> z 20 ~ z w :a: i= s 0 ...J u.. 10 ~ ::5 0::: w 6 --0 EXAMPLE: Given: Watercourse Distance (D) = 70 Feet Slope (s) =1.3% Runoff Coefficient (C) = 0.41 Overland Flow Time (T) = 9.5 Minutes T= 1.8(1.1-C)Vo 3\fS SOURCE: Airport Drainage, Federal Aviation Administration, 1965 FIGURE Rational Formula -Overland Time of Flow Nomograph 3·3 .6.E Feet 5000 4000 Tc Tc L AE = = = = EQUATION c~~sy.385 Time of concentration (hours) Watercourse Distance (miles) Change in elevation along effective slope line {See Figure 3-5)(feet) 3000 20.00 400 300 200 100 5 AE SOURCE: California Division of Highways (1941) and Kirpich (1940) L Miles Feet 0.5 L . 3000 ' 2000 1800 1600 500 200 ' Nomograph for Determination of ' ' Tc Hours Minutes 4 3 2 ' ' ' Tc 240 180 120 60 50 5 Time of Concentration (Tc) or Travel Time (Tt) for Natural watersheds FIGURE ~ Soil Map-San Diego County Area, California Map Salle: 1:2,670 if printed on A portra~ (8.5" X 11 ")sheet N A 0~----~3~5====~70~----------~1~~~===========?21~ 0~----100~==~200~---------~~========~600~ Map projection: Web Mercator Canerooordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 USQ.\ Natural Resources Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey a. Conservation Service 12/5/2014 Page 1 of 3 ~ Soil Map-San Diego County Area, California MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) D Area of Interest (AOI) Soils D Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines El Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features ~ 181 • 0 ;x; . .. 0 A. • ~ 0 0 v + .. . .. 0 0 ~ - Natural Resources Conservation Service Blowout Borrow P~ Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot E) Spoil Area 0 Stony Spot 4) Very Stony Spot ~ Wet Spot 6 Other ... Special Line Features Water Features .,...., Streams and Canals Transportation +++ Rails _, Interstate Highways _, US Routes ~ Major Roads Local Roads Background • Aerial Photography Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below . Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: San Diego County Area, California Version 8, Sep 17, 2014 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: May 3, 201 0-Jun 19, 2010 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. 12/5/2014 Page 2 of3 Soil Map-San Diego County Area, California Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol AtE2 ExE HrE2 HuE SbC Totals for Area of Interest !JSQA Natural Resources ,_ Conservation Service San Diego County Area, California (CA638) Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Altamont clay, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded Exchequer rocky silt loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes Huerhuero loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded Huerhuero-Urban land complex, 9 to 30 percent slopes Salinas clay loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey Percent of AOI 4.1 28.0 2.6 0.6 2.6 38.0 10.9% 73.8% 7.0% 1.5% 6.9% 100.0% 12/5/2014 Page 3 of3 San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c)1991-2009 Version 7.8 Rational method hydrology program based on San Diego County Flood Control Division 2003 hydrology manual Rational Hydrology Study Date: 03/08/15 Cascada Verde Vesting Tentative Map Preliminary Analysis Existing Conditions 100-Year Storm Event ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** Program License Serial Number 4028 Rational hydrology study storm event year is English (in-lb) input data Units used Map data precipitation entered: 6 hour, precipitation(inches) = 2.800 24 hour precipitation(inches) = 4.900 P6/P24 = 57.1% San Diego hydrology manual 'C' values used 100.0 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 11.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group C Decimal fraction soil group D [UNDISTURBED NATURAL TERRAIN (Permanent Open Space ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.000 Sub-Area C Value = 0.350 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 Initial subarea total flow distance 162.000(Ft.) Highest elevation= 104.000(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 49.000(Ft.) Elevation difference 55.000(Ft.) Slope= 33.951 % INITIAL AREA TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS: The maximum overland flow distance is 100.00 (Ft) for the top area slope value of 33.95 %, in a development type of Permanent Open Space In Accordance With Figure 3-3 Initial Area Time of Concentration = 4.17 minutes TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)A.5)/(% slopeA(1/3)] TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.3500)*( 100.000A.5)/( 33.951A(1/3)]= 4.17 The initial area total distance of 162.00 (Ft.) entered leaves a remaining distance of 62.00 (Ft.) Using Figure 3-4, the travel time for this distance is 0.28 minutes for a distance of 62.00 (Ft.) and a slope of 33.95 % with an elevation difference of 21.05(Ft.) from the end of the top area Tt = [11.9*length(Mi)A3)/(elevation change(Ft.))]A.385 *60(min/hr) 0.284 Minutes Tt=[(11.9*0.0117A3)/( 21.05)]A.385= 0.28 Total initial area Ti = 4.17 minutes from Figure 3-3 formula plus 0.28 minutes from the Figure 3-4 formula= 4.45 minutes Calculated TC of 4.453 minutes is less than 5 minutes, resetting TC to 5.0 minutes for rainfall intensity calculations Rainfall intensity (I) = 7.377(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.350 Subarea runoff= 2.505(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.970(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 20.000 to Point/Station 21.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group c 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D 1.000 [UNDISTURBED NATURAL TERRAIN (Permanent Open Space ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.000 Sub-Area C Value = 0.350 Initial subarea total flow distance Highest elevation= 59.000(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 36.000(Ft.) 41.000(Ft.) Elevation difference 23.000(Ft.) Slope= 56.098 % INITIAL AREA TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS: The maximum overland flow distance is 100.00 (Ft) for the top area slope value of 56.10 %, in a development type of Permanent Open Space In Accordance With Figure 3-3 Initial Area Time of Concentration TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)A.5)/(% TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.3500)*( 100.000A.5)/( 3.53 minutes slopeA(1/3)] 56.098A(1/3)]= Calculated TC of 3.527 minutes is less than 5 minutes, 3.53 resetting TC to 5.0 minutes for rainfall intensity calculations Rainfall intensity (I) = 7.377(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.350 Subarea runoff= 0.129(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.050(Ac.) 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 21.000 to Point/Station 22.000 **** IMPROVED CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME **** Upstream point elevation= 36.000(Ft.) Downstream point elevation 34.000(Ft.) Channel length thru subarea 57.000(Ft.) Channel base width 3.000(Ft.) Slope or 'Z' of left channel bank= 20.000 Slope or 'Z' of right channel bank= 20.000 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel 2.195(CFS) Manning's 'N' = 0.040 Maximum depth of channel 1.000(Ft.) Flow(q) thru subarea= 2.195(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.189(Ft.), Average velocity 1.707(Ft/s) Channel flow top width= 10.577(Ft.) Flow Velocity= 1.71(Ft/s) Travel time 0.56 min. Time of concentration = 4.08 min. Critical depth= 0.176(Ft.) Adding area flow to channel Calculated TC of 4.083 minutes is less than 5 minutes, resetting TC to 5.0 minutes for rainfall intensity calculations Rainfall intensity (I) = 7.377(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D 1.000 [UNDISTURBED NATURAL TERRAIN (Permanent Open Space ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.000 Sub-Area C Value = 0.350 Rainfall intensity= 7.377(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for total area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.350 CA = 0.577 Subarea runoff= 4.131(CFS) for 1.600(Ac.) Total runoff= 4.260(CFS) Total area= 1.650(Ac.) Depth of flow= 0.257(Ft.), Average velocity 2.031(Ft/s) Critical depth= 0.244(Ft.) End of computations, total study area 2.620 (Ac.) 3 San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c)1991-2009 Version 7.8 Rational method hydrology program based on San Diego County Flood Control Division 2003 hydrology manual Rational Hydrology Study Date: 05/25/15 Cascada Verde Vesting Tentative Map Preliminary Analysis Proposed Conditions 100-Year Storm Event ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** Program License Serial Number 4028 Rational hydrology study storm event year is English (in-lb) input data Units used Map data precipitation entered: 6 hour, precipitation(inches) = 2.800 24 hour precipitation(inches) = 4.900 P6/P24 = 57.1% San Diego hydrology manual 'C' values used 100.0 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 11.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group c 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D 1.000 [UNDISTURBED NATURAL TERRAIN (Permanent Open Space ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.000 Sub-Area C Value = 0.350 Initial subarea total flow distance 73.000(Ft.) Highest elevation= 104.000(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 75.000(Ft.) Elevation difference 29.000(Ft.) Slope= 39.726% INITIAL AREA TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS: The maximum overland flow distance is 100.00 (Ft) for the top area slope value of 39.73 %, in a development type of Permanent Open Space In Accordance With Figure 3-3 1 Initial Area Time of Concentration= 3.96 minutes TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)A.5)/(% slopeA(1/3)] TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.3500)*( 100.000A.5)/( 39.726A(1/3)]= 3.96 Calculated TC of 3.956 minutes is less than 5 minutes, resetting TC to 5.0 minutes for rainfall intensity calculations Rainfall intensity (I) = 7.377(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.350 Subarea runoff= 0.155(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.060(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Point/Station 12.000 **** IMPROVED CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME **** Upstream point elevation= 75.000(Ft.) Downstream point elevation 68.000(Ft.) Channel length thru subarea 177.000(Ft.) Channel base width 0.500(Ft.) Slope or 'Z' of left channel bank= Slope or 'Z' of right channel bank= Manning's 'N' = 0.016 2.000 2.000 Maximum depth of channel 1.000(Ft.) Flow(q) thru subarea= 0.155(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.081(Ft.), Average velocity Channel flow top width= 0.823(Ft.) Flow Velocity= 2.90(Ft/s) Travel time 1.02 min. Time of concentration 4.98 min. Critical depth= 0.121(Ft.) 2.896(Ft/s) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 12.000 to Point/Station 13.000 **** IMPROVED CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME **** Upstream point elevation= 68.000(Ft.) Downstream point elevation 55.000(Ft.) Channel length thru subarea 30.000(Ft.) Channel base width 0.500(Ft.) Slope or 'Z' of left channel bank= 2.000 Slope or 'Z' of right channel bank= 2.000 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel Manning's 'N' = 0.016 Maximum depth of channel 1.000(Ft.) Flow(q) thru subarea= 0.336(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.064(Ft.), Average velocity Channel flow top width= 0.755(Ft.) Flow Velocity= 8.40(Ft/s) Travel time 0.06 min. Time of concentration 5.03 min. Critical depth= 0.188(Ft.) 2 0.336(CFS) 8.399(Ft/s) Adding area flow to channel Rainfall intensity (I) = Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group C Decimal fraction soil group D [UNDISTURBED NATURAL TERRAIN (Permanent Open Space ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.000 Sub-Area C Value = 0.350 7.344(In/Hr) for a 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 100.0 year storm Rainfall intensity= 7.344(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for total area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.350 CA = 0.070 Subarea runoff= 0.359(CFS) for 0.140(Ac.) Total runoff= 0.514(CFS) Total area= 0.200(Ac.) Depth of flow= 0.081(Ft.), Average velocity= 9.594(Ft/s) Critical depth= 0.234(Ft.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 13.000 to Point/Station 14.000 **** IMPROVED CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME **** Covered channel Upstream point elevation 52.000(Ft.) Downstream point elevation 50.300(Ft.) Channel length thru subarea 154.000(Ft.) Channel base width 0.500(Ft.) Slope or 'Z' of left channel bank= 50.000 Slope or 'Z' of right channel bank= 50.000 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel Manning's 'N' = 0.018 Maximum depth of channel 1.000(Ft.) Flow(q) thru subarea= 1.903(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.150(Ft.), Average velocity Channel flow top width= 15.539(Ft.) Flow Velocity= 1.58(Ft/s) Travel time 1.63 min. Time of concentration= 6.66 min. Critical depth= 0.150(Ft.) Adding area flow to channel Rainfall intensity (I) = Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group C Decimal fraction soil group D [HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (43.0 DU/A or Less ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.800 Sub-Area C Value= 0.790 6.131(In/Hr) 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 for a 1.903(CFS) 1.578(Ft/s) 100.0 year storm Rainfall intensity= 6.131(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for total area 3 (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.681 CA = 0.552 Subarea runoff= 2.870(CFS) for 0.610(Ac.) Total runoff = Depth of flow = Critical depth = 3.384(CFS) Total area= 0.810(Ac.) 0.188(Ft.), Average velocity= 1.822(Ft/s) 0.190(Ft.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 14.000 to Point/Station 15.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation= 50.300(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation 43.000(Ft.) Pipe length 301.00(Ft.) Slope 0.0243 Manning's N 0.013 No. of pipes= 1 Required pipe flow 3.384(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow 3.384(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 6.77(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.90(In.) Critical Depth= 9.44(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 7.41(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.68 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 7.34 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 14.000 to Point/Station 15.000 **** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Rainfall intensity (I) = Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group C Decimal fraction soil group D [MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (10.9 DU/A or Less Impervious value, Ai = 0.450 Sub-Area C Value= 0.600 5.760(In/Hr) for a 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 Time of concentration= 7.34 min. 100.0 year storm Rainfall intensity= 5.760(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for total area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.668 CA = 0.648 Subarea runoff 0.348(CFS) for 0.160(Ac.) Total runoff= 3.732(CFS) Total area= 0.970(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 15.000 to Point/Station 16.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = Downstream point/station elevation 4 43.000(Ft.) 34.000(Ft.) Pipe length 10.00(Ft.) Slope= 0.9000 Manning's N 0.013 No. of pipes 1 Required pipe flow 3.732(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter 6.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow 3.732(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 3.70(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 5.83(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity= 29.34(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe 0.01 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 7.34 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 15.000 to Point/Station 16.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area= 0.970(Ac.) Runoff from this stream 3.732(CFS) Time of concentration= 7.34 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.757(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 20.000 to Point/Station 21.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group C Decimal fraction soil group D [HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (43.0 DU/A or Less ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.800 Sub-Area C Value= 0.790 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 Initial subarea total flow distance 40.000(Ft.) Highest elevation= 49.500(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 49.000(Ft.) Elevation difference 0.500(Ft.) Slope= 1.250% INITIAL AREA TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS: The maximum overland flow distance is 65.00 (Ft) for the top area slope value of 1.25 %, in a development type of 43.0 DU/A or Less In Accordance With Figure 3-3 Initial Area Time of Concentration TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)A.5)/(% TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.7900)*( 65.000A.5)/( 4.18 minutes slopeA(1/3)] 1.250A(1/3)]= Calculated TC of 4.176 minutes is less than 5 minutes, 4.18 resetting TC to 5.0 minutes for rainfall intensity calculations Rainfall intensity (I) = 7.377(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm 5 Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C 0.790 Subarea runoff= 0.117(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.020(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 21.000 to Point/Station 22.000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of street segment elevation= 49.000(Ft.) End of street segment elevation= 39.900(Ft.) Length of street segment 652.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.) Width of half street (curb to crown) 24.000(Ft.) Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020 Street flow is on [1] side(s) of the street Distance from curb to property line 5.000(Ft.) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020 Gutter width= 1.500(Ft.) Gutter hike from flowline= 1.500(In.) Manning's N in gutter= 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0180 Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0180 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = Depth of flow= 0.323(Ft.), Average velocity= Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width= 11.393(Ft.) Flow velocity= 2.39(Ft/s) Travel time= 4.55 min. TC = 8.73 min. Adding area flow to street Rainfall intensity (I) = Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group C Decimal fraction soil group D [HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (43.0 DU/A or Less ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.800 Sub-Area C Value= 0.790 5.151(In/Hr) for a 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 3.270(CFS) 2.388(Ft/s) 100.0 year storm Rainfall intensity= 5.151(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for total area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.790 CA = 1.264 Subarea runoff 6.394(CFS) for 1.580(Ac.) Total runoff= 6.511(CFS) Total area= 1.600(Ac.) Street flow at end of street = 6.511(CFS) Half street flow at end of street= 6.511(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.395(Ft.), Average velocity= 2.813(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 14.978(Ft.) 6 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 22.000 to Point/Station 23.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation= 39.900(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation 37.500(Ft.) Pipe length 113.00(Ft.) Slope 0.0212 Manning's N No. of pipes= 1 Required pipe flow 6.511(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter 15.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow 6.511(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 9.18(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 14.62(In.) Critical Depth= 12.34(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 8.28(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.23 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 8.95 min. 0.013 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 23.000 **** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Rainfall intensity (I) = 5.066(In/Hr) for a 0.000 100.0 year storm Decimal fraction soil group A Decimal fraction soil group B Decimal fraction soil group c Decimal fraction soil group D [UNDISTURBED NATURAL TERRAIN (Permanent Open Space ) Impervious value, Ai = 0.000 Sub-Area C Value = 0.350 0.000 0.000 1. 000 The area added to the existing stream causes a a lower flow rate of Q = 6.492(CFS) therefore the upstream flow rate of Q = 6.511(CFS) is being used Time of concentration = 8.95 min. Rainfall intensity = 5.066(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for total area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.777 CA = 1.282 Subarea runoff O.OOO(CFS) for 0.050(Ac.) Total runoff= 6.511(CFS) Total area= 1.650(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 16.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = Downstream point/station elevation Pipe length 144.00(Ft.) Slope No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow Nearest computed pipe diameter Calculated individual pipe flow 7 3 3 . 0 0 0 ( Ft . ) 31 . 50 0 ( Ft . ) 0.0104 Manning's N 6.511(CFS) 15.00(In.) 6.5ll(CFS) 0. 013 Normal flow depth in pipe Flow top width inside pipe = Critical Depth= 12.34(In.) 12.14(In.) 11.78(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 6.12(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.39 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 9.35 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 16.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area= 1.650(Ac.) Runoff from this stream 6.511(CFS) Time of concentration = Rainfall intensity = Summary of stream data: 9.35 min. 4.928(In/Hr) Stream No. Flow rate (CFS) TC (min) Rainfall Intensity ( In/Hr) 1 3.732 7.34 5.757 2 6. 511 9.35 4.928 Qmax(1) 1. 000 * 1. 000 * 3.732) + 1. 000 * 0.786 * 6. 511) + 8.848 Qmax(2) 0.856 * 1. 000 * 3.732) + 1. 000 * 1. 000 * 6.511) + 9.705 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 3.732 6.511 Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data: 8.848 9.705 Area of streams before confluence: 0.970 1.650 Results of confluence: Total flow rate= 9.705(CFS) Time of concentration = 9.346 min. Effective stream area after confluence End of computations, total study area = 8 2.620(Ac.) 2.620 (Ac.) APPENDIX B DOWNSTREAM HYDRAULIC ANALYSES CARLSBAD DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN Prepared for City of Carlsbad, Carlsbad, California July 3, 2008 BROWN AND CALDWELL 9665 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 201 San Diego, California 92123 3: Methodology, Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan downstream of Junction J3. The localized flooding within the City street can be minimized by providing conveyance capacity with the proposed 30-inch RCP. It is recommended to construct the 30-inch RCP and a junction structure to connect to an existing 48-inch drainage facility. 3.6.6 Drainage Project BCC -Chestnut Avenue Drainage Project Drainage project BCC originates within an existing residential area. Its main purpose is to minimize localized flooding around Chestnut Street adjacent to Carlsbad High school and to accommodate stormwater runoff within the community by providing a drainage improvement comprised of a new 36-inch RCP. The contributing drainage area of 84.8 acres generates a peak discharge volume of Q=82.9 cfs for the 1 00-year, 6-hour storm event. This calculated runoff volume would exceed the assumed roadway geometry flood limits of 0.5 foot depth and would create localized flooding within the traveled way, downstream of Junction J14, J15 and J16. The localized flooding within the City street can be minimized by providing conveyance capacity with the proposed 36-inch RCP. Therefore, it is recommended to construct the proposed 36-inch RCP. The proposed culvert will connect to an existing junction structure for an existing 42-inch lateral further downstream on Chestnut Street. 3.6. 7 Drainage Project C1 -Carlsbad Boulevard South Drainage Improvements Drainage project C1 is a proposed 12-foot by 5-foot Reinforced Concrete Box culvert with a length of 50 linear feet (L.F.). Its main purpose is to provide additional capacity to the existing bridge that conveys the Encinas Creek flow beneath the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard. The contributing drainage area of 2,300 acres generates a peak discharge volume of Q=1,396.0 cfs for the 100-year, 6-hour storm event. When existing conditions are modeled (two 10-foot by 5-foot RCB) there is evidence of flooding at junction J83. The addition of a 12-foot by 5-foot Reinforced Concrete Box minimizes the flooding and stabilizes the velocity of flow. It is recommended to construct the additional12-foot by 5-foot Reinforced Concrete Box culvert to provide for additional capacity to the existing bridge. 3.6.8 Drainage Project C2 -Paseo Del Norte Drainage Improvements Drainage project C2 is a proposed 10-foot by 4-foot Reinforced Concrete Box culvert with a length of 90 linear feet (L.F.). Its main purpose is to provide additional capacity to the existing bridge that conveys the Encinas Creek flow beneath the lanes of Paseo Del Norte. The contributing drainage area of 1,993 acres generates a peak discharge volume of Q=1184.0 cfs for the 100-year, 6-hour storm event. When existing conditions are modeled (three 10-foot by 5-foot RCB) there is evidence of flooding at junction J7 0. The addition of a 10-foot by 5-foot Reinforced Concrete Box minimizes the flooding and stabilizes the velocity of flow. It is recommended to construct the additional10-foot by 5-foot Reinforced Concrete Box culvert to provide for additional capacity to the existing bridge. 3.6.9 Drainage Project DH -Altiva Place Canyon Restoration and Enhancement Project Drainage project DH originates within an existing residential area. Its main purpose is to reduce erosive velocities within the conveyance channel and aid in the reduction of sediment. The drainage improvement is comprised of 800 feet of unlined trapezoidal channel. 3-17 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document. 3: Methodology, Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan The contributing drainage area of 358 acres generates a peak discharge volume of Q=628.0 cfs for the 100-year, 6-hour storm event. When existing conditions are modeled as a trapezoidal channel, there is evidence of high velocities and flooding at the connection to the existing 72-inch lateral for a short period of time. The existing channel must connect to an existing 72-inch lateral under Alicante Road. The typical 25-year, 6-hour storm event does not show evidence of flooding through the modeled alignment. It is recommended to install the channel enhancement to minimize the runoff velocities and promote efficient conveyance to the 72-inch RCP. 3-18 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document. Normal Depth Analysis for Channel in Golf Course Friction Method Solve For lnp!Jt Data Roughness Coefficient Channel Slope Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Bottom Width Discharge ' -,_ Results Normal Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type .<WP lnput·p~ta Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps .GVP Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headless Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Manning Formula Normal Depth Supercritical 0.014 0.00450 ft/ft 1.50 ft/ft (H:V) 1.50 ft/ft (H:V) 3.00 ft 628.00 ft3/s 4.80 ft 49.03 ft2 20.32 ft 2.41 ft 17.41 ft 5.51 ft 0.00240 ft/ft 12.81 ft/s 2.55 ft 7.35 ft 1.35 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 4.80 ft 5.51 ft 0.00450 ft/ft -·················------·-········-·-··-~~·-·······-~--···--·----~--~-·-··-·······-----········~~-~-----···----···········----······ Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Sclllii!U4ile~ldM\IIasterV8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 3/8/2015 8:47:15 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS VOLUME 1 OF 11 Community Name Community Number SAN DIEGO COUNTY, UNINCORPORATED AREAS 060284 CARLSBAD, CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CITY OF CORONADO, CITY OF DEL MAR, CITY OF EL CAJON, CITY OF ENCINITAS, CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH, CITY OF LA MESA, CITY OF LEMON GROVE, CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CITY OF POWAY, CITY OF SAN DIEGO, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CITY OF SANTEE, CITY OF SOLANA BEACH, CITY OF VISTA, CITY OF 060285 065021 060287 060288 060289 060726 060290 060291 060292 060723 060293 060294 060702 060295 060296 060703 060725 060297 REVISED May 16, 2012 San Diego County Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 06073CV001 C TABLE 8: SUMMARY OF PEAK DISCHARGES Peak Discharges (cubic feet per second) San Marcos Creek Upstream of the San Marcos Dam (Lake San 28.1 ----15,700 Marcos) Upstream of Discovery Street --7,400 13,300 14,700 19,350 Upstream of Confluence with Las Posas Creek --6,450 11,650 13,150 16,950 Upstream of Highway 78 --6,200 11,000 12,450 16,000 Upstream of Confluence with Twin Oaks Valley --2,600 4,550 5,150 6,600 Creek Approximately 1,000 Feet Upstream of --2,200 3,900 4,400 5,600 Confluence with Twin Oaks Valley Creek San Vicente Creek At Mouth 83.0 1,400 10,500 16,000 34,000 Santa Maria Creek (Santa Maria Valley Area) Below Confluence with North Tributary 33.1 1,900 9,200 15,600 42,000 Santa Maria Creek (San Pasqual Valley Area) At Confluence with Santa Ysabel Creek 60.0 3,200 14,700 19,000 30,000 --Data Not Available 5 Discharge Decreases With Increasing Area Due to Breakouts From the Low Flow Channel 88 FILE: pipe. WSW W S P G W -CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 1 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-8-2015 Time: 7:33: 5 Cascada Verde 72-inch RCP Analysis Determine Flow Rate with upstream HGL at 39.0' to match 100-year HGL in 96-inch RCP ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert I Depth I Water I Q I Vel Vel Energy I Super [Critical[Flow Top[Height/[Base Wt[ [No Wth Station I Elev I (FT) I Elev I (CFS) I (FPS) Head I Grd.El. I Elev I Depth I Width [Dia.-FT[or I.D. I ZL [Prs/Pip -[--I--[--I--I--[--I--I--[--I--I- -I- -I--I L/Elem [Ch Slope I I I I SF Ave I HF [SE Dpth[Froude N[Norm Dp I "N" I X-Fall[ ZR [Type Ch *********l*********l********l*********l*********l*******l*******l*********l*******l********l********l*******l*******l***** [******* I I I I I I I I I I 1000.000 26.000 4.449 30.449 397.00 17.66 4. 8 4 35.29 . 00 5.32 5. 25 6.000 .000 .00 1 . 0 -[--I--I--[--I- -I--[--I--[--I- -I--[--I-[- 45.976 . 0130 .0106 . 49 4.45 1. 50 4.14 . 013 .00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I I 1045.976 26.598 4.543 31.141 397.00 17.28 4.64 35.78 . 00 5.32 5.15 6.000 .000 .00 1 . 0 -I- -I--[--I--I--[--I--I--[--[--I- -I--[-1- 61.922 . 0130 .0098 . 61 4.54 1. 44 4.14 .013 . 00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I 1107.899 27.403 4.768 32.171 397.00 16.48 4.22 36.39 . 00 5.32 4.85 6.000 .000 .00 1 . 0 -I- -I--[- -[--I--[- -[- -[- -[--[--I- -I--I-1- 31.7 58 . 0130 .0089 .28 4.77 1. 30 4.14 . 013 . 00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I 1139.657 27.816 5.021 32.837 397.00 15.71 3.83 36.67 . 00 5.32 4.43 6.000 .000 .00 1 . 0 -[--I- -I--I--I- -I--[--I--[- -[--I--[--[-1- 10.343 . 0130 .0082 .08 5.02 1.16 4.14 . 013 . 00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I I I 1150.000 27.950 5.320 33.270 397.00 14.98 3.48 36.7 5 . 00 5.32 3.80 6.000 .000 .00 1 . 0 -[--I--[--I- -I- -I--[- -[--[--[--[--[--I-1- WALL ENTRANCE I I I I I I I I I 1150.000 27.950 11.050 39.000 397.00 5.13 . 41 39.41 .00 4.64 7.00 25.000 7.000 .00 0 . 0 -[--[--[--[--[--I--[- -[--I--I--I--[--[-[- FILE: pipe96.WSW W S P G W-CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 1 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 3-8-2015 Time: 6:45:52 Cascada Verde 96-inch RCP Analysis 100-Year Flow Rate ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert Station I Elev -I- I Depth I I (FT) I -I- Water Elev -I- I I Q (CFS) -I- I Vel I (FPS) -[- Vel Head I -[- Energy I Super [Critical[Flow Top[Height/[Base Wt[ Grd.El. I Elev I Depth I Width [Dia.-FT[or I.D. I -[--[--[--[--[--[- ZL -[- L/Elem [Ch Slope I I I I SF Ave[ HF [SE Dpth[Froude N[Norm Dp I "N" I X-Falll ZR *********l*********l********l*********l*********l*******l*******l*********l*******l********l********l*******l*******l***** I I I I I I I I I I 1000.000 26.000 5.108 31.108 638.00 18.83 5.50 36.61 .00 6.41 7.69 8.000 .000 .00 -[- -[--1--1--1--[--[--[--[--1--[--[--[- 7.328 .0130 .0090 .07 5.11 1.58 4.53 .013 .00 .00 I I I I I I I I I I I 1007.328 26.095 5.128 31.223 638.00 18.74 5.46 36.68 .00 6.41 7.68 8.000 .000 .00 -[--1--1--1--1--1--1--1--1--1--[--[--[- 60.457 .0130 .0084 .51 5.13 1.57 4.53 .013 .00 .00 1067.785 I 26.881 -1- 39.242 . 0130 1107. 027 24.771 I 27.391 -1- . 0130 1131.798 I 27.713 -1- 13.742 . 0130 1145.540 27.892 -[- 4.460 . 0130 1150.000 1150.000 27.950 -[- I 27.950 -[- 5.346 -[- 5.580 -I- 5.833 -I- I 6.109 -[- I 6.415 -[- I 11.049 -I- 32.227 -I- 32.971 -[- I 33.546 -I- I 34.001 -I- I 34.365 -I- I 38.999 -I- I I I I I I I I I 638.00 17.87 4.96 37.19 .00 6.41 7.53 8.000 .000 .00 -[--[--[--1--[--[--1--[--[--[- I 638.00 -I- I 638.00 -[- I 638.00 -I- I 638.00 -I- I 638.00 -I- I 17.04 -I- I 16.25 -I- I 15.49 -I- 14.77 -I- I 6.42 -I- .0075 .29 5.35 1.45 4.53 .013 .00 .00 I I I I I I I 4.51 37.48 .00 6.41 7.35 8.000 .000 .00 -1--[--1--1--1--[--[- -[- .0067 .17 5.58 1.33 4.53 .013 .00 .00 I I I I I I I 4.10 37.65 .00 6.41 7.11 8.000 .000 .00 -[--1--[--[--1--[--[- -[- .0060 .08 5.83 1.22 4.53 .013 .00 .00 I I I I I I I 3.73 37.73 .00 6.41 6.80 8.000 .000 .00 -[--[--1--1--1--[- -[--[- .0054 .02 6.11 1.11 4.53 .013 .00 .00 3.39 -I- WALL .64 -I- I I I I I I 37.75 .00 6.41 6.38 8.000 .000 .00 -1--1--1--1--[- -[--[- ENTRANCE I 39.64 -I- I . 00 -I- 5.38 -[- I 9.00 -I- I 25.000 -[- I 9.000 -[- I .00 -[- [No Wth [Prs/Pip -I [Type Ch [******* 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 • 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 1- 0 • 0 1- San Marcos Creek HEC-RAS With and Without Additional Project Flows HEC-RAS Plan: San Marcos Creek River: RIVER-1 Reach: Reach-1 Reach RiverSta Profile QTotal MinCh El W.S. Elev CritW.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top 1/\/idth Froude#Chl (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft!ft) (ft!s) (sq ft) .. (ft) Reach-1 1 PF .1 15700.00 6.00 17.66 17.1 18.20 0.0025 7.95 3272 1173.08 0.46 Reach-1 1 PF 2 15941.00 6.00 17.69 17.2 18.23 0.0025 7.97 3310 1174.62 0.46 Reach-1 2 PF 1 15700.00 6.00 18.16 18.77 0.0030 8.63 3051 1148.52 0.49 Reach-1 2 PF2 15941.00 6.00 18.19 18.80 0.0030 8.64 3087 1149.06 0.49 Reach-1 3 PF 1 15700.00 8.00 18.94 19.29 0.0021 6.04 3421 960.37 0.40 Reach-1 3 PF2 15941.00 8.00 18.97 19.32 0.0021 6.08 3449 962.66 0.40 Reach-1 4 PF 1 15700.00 8.00 19.35 19.58 0.0010 3.99 4170 895.25 0.28 Reach-1 4 PF 2 15941.00 8.00 19.38 19.62 0.0010 4.02 4199 896.21 0.28 Reach-1 5 PF 1 15700.00 8.00 19.49 19.95 0.0025 7.12 3256 1133.03 0.44 Reach-1 5 PF 2 15941.00 8.00 19.52 19.99 0.0025 7.14 3297 1135.70 0.44 Reach-1 6 PF 1 15700.00 10.00 20.15 20.1 21.29 0.0063 11.01 2215 880.90 0.72 Reach-1 6 PF 2 15941.00 10.00 20.18 20.2 21.32 0.0063 11.02 2244 882.42 0.72 Reach-1 7 PF 1 15700.00 10.00 21.75 21.8 23.23 0.0071 11.58 1914 680.03 0.75 Reach-1 7 PF 2 15941.00 10.00 21.79 21.8 23.27 0.0070 11.59 1941 683.49 0.75 Reach-1 8 PF 1 15700.00 10.00 23.54 23.87 0.0013 6.04 3766 934.92 0.34 Reach-1 8 PF 2 15941.00 10.00 23.57 23.91 0.0014 6.07 3800 937.68 0.34 Reach-1 9 PF 1 15700.00 10.00 23.82 24.13 0.0012 5.81 3753 821.46 0.33 Reach-1 9 PF 2 15941.00 10.00 23.86 24.17 0.0012 5.84 3784 821.78 0.33 Reach-1 10 PF 1 15700.00 12.00 24.09 24.37 0.0011 5.16 3837 803.29 0.31 Reach-1 10 PF 2 15941.00 12.00 24.12 24.41 0.0011 5.19 3868 803.39 0.31 Reach-1 11 PF 1 15700.00 12.00 24.14 22.2 24.59 0.0019 6.91 3113 741.57 0.40 Reach-1 11 PF 2 15941.00 12.00 24.18 22.2 24.64 0.0019 6.95 3141 742.91 0.41 Reach-1 12 PF 1 15700.00 12.00 24.48 24.99 0.0019 7.50 3023 687.43 0.41 Reach-1 12 PF 2 15700.00 12.00 24.53 25.02 0.0019 7.41 3054 688.77 0.41 Reach-1 13 PF 1 15700.00 12.00 24.77 25.53 0.0028 9.11 2674 746.40 0.50 Reach-1 13 PF 2 15700.00 12.00 24.81 25.54 0.0028 9.00 2702 747.74 0.50 Reach-1 14 PF 1 15700.00 12.00 25.63 25.82 0.0007 4.64 4578 832.45 0.25 Reach-1 14 PF 2 15700.00 12.00 25.64 25.84 0.0007 4.62 4590 832.61 0.24 Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS= 14 .035 .04 .035 70-i I Legend -----+---:1 ~ I INS PF 2 INS PF 1 g --c Ground 0 • ~ Bank Sta > .. jjj 30 20 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS = 13 .035 .04 .035 80 Legend 70 --INS PF 2 ---60 INS PF 1 g --c: 50 Ground .Q I • iii Bank Sta > 40 .. jjj 30 20 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS= 12 .035 .04 .035 80 Legend 70 --INS PF 2 ---60 INS PF 1 g --c: 50 Ground 0 • ~ Bank Sta > 40 .. jjj 30 20 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Station (It) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS= 11 .035 -.04 .035 80 Legend 70 --INS PF 2 ---60 INS PF 1 g -c: 50 Ground .Q _ __/ ----llr-<;; \neff > 40 Q) • w Bank Sta 30 20 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS= 10 .035 .04 .035 80 Legend 70 --INS PF 2 ---60 INS PF 1 g -c: 50 Ground .Q r--• <;; Bank Sta > 40 ~ LU 30 20 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=9 .035 .04 .035 701 60 ~ INS PF 2 --- g ::~l 1 ~1 c: I Ground ~ Ban~ Sta "' > Q) w 30 20 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Station (ft) §: l5 "" ~ ili §: c: 0 "" "' > ~ w §: c: 2 "' > ~ w Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=8 IE---------.035 .04 .035--------------------->! 50 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Stalion (It) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=7 .035 .04 .035 501 30J \ ~ 20 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Station (It) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=6 .035 .04 .035 501 r ~l\ 30 ~ 20 10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Stalion (It) 1600 I Legend --WSPF2 WSPF1 Ground • Bank Sta Legend -------WSPF2 ---WSPF1 1--Ground Ban~ Sta 1800 I Legend ____.__ WSPF2 ---WSPF1 -Ground • Bank Sta 1800 Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=5 .035 .04 .035 501 I 'Legend --------"~ ~ WSPF2 ---WSPF1 g -30 Ground l5 • ., "' Bank Sta > .S! 20 w 10 0 0 200 400 600 BOO 1000 1200 1400 1600 1BOO Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=4 .035 .04 .035 "~ Legend 40 ~ _____.____ WSPF2 35 ---WSPF1 g 30 -c:: Ground 0 25 • ~ ~ Bank Sta > .S! 20 w 15 10 5 0 200 400 600 BOO 1000 1200 1400 1600 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS=3 .035 .04 .035 401 r Legend ____.__ WSPF2 ---WSPF1 g 25~ ~ ~~-c:: Ground g Bant Sta "' > 20 .S! w 15 10 5 0 200 400 600 BOO 1000 1200 1400 1600 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS = 2 40"" .035 .04· .035 :1 ~ WSPF2 ---WSPF 1 g ~ ----c: Ground 0 • :;; Bank Sta > 20 "' iiJ 15 10 5 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Station (ft) Altisma Plan: San Marcos Creek RS= 1 .035 .04 .035 30-4 r Legend ----25 \ / WSPF2 ---WSPF 1 g -c: 20 Ground 0 t I . ------6--"' ' .7 .. ~ ~· I neff > "' 15 • iiJ • Bank Sta 10 5 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Station (ft) APPENDIX C ON-SITE HEC-RAS ANALYSIS HEC-RAS Plan: PC 2nd River: River1 Reach: Reach1 Profile: PF 1 Reach River Sta Profile QTotal MinCh El W.S. Elev Grit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Froude #Chi (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ftlft) (ft/s) (sq ft) (ft) Reach1 1 PF 1 628.00 27.30 39.00 31 .2 39.02 0.0003 1.08 594 69.44 0.06 Reach1 2 PF 1 628.00 29.00 39.01 39.05 0.0010 1.80 366 47.31 0.1 1 Reach1 3 PF 1 628.00 31.20 39.09 39.13 0.0009 1.49 430 70.45 0.10 Reach1 4 PF 1 628.00 33.60 39.13 39.17 0.0011 1.49 428 86.05 0.12 Reach1 5 PF 1 628.00 34.00 39.21 39.26 0.0019 1.81 352 76.67 0.15 Reach1 6 PF 1 628.00 34.26 39.27 39.55 0.0194 4.25 149 51 .16 0.43 Reach1 7 PF 1 628.00 36.31 40.33 40.3 41.67 0.1088 9.34 68 25.78 1.00 Reach1 8 PF 1 628.00 37.57 43.57 44.03 0.0178 5.46 120 27.13 0.44 Reach1 9 PF 1 628.00 37.92 45.02 45.69 0.0190 6.59 101 18.18 0.47 Reach1 10 PF 1 628.00 38.10 45.87 46.08 0.0040 3.69 170 21.98 0.23 Reach1 10.5 Culvert Reach1 11 PF 1 628.00 40.87 46.56 44.1 47.08 0.0151 5.81 108 37.52 0.43 Reach1 11.5 PF 1 628.00 40.90 47.40 47.76 0.0205 4.83 130 36.59 0.45 Reach1 13 PF 1 628.00 40.96 48.19 48.51 0.0120 4.52 141 29.54 0.36 Reach1 14 PF 1 628.00 40.97 48.30 48.66 0.0133 4.86 134 27.86 0.38 Reach1 15 PF 1 628.00 40.99 48.73 48.98 0.0086 3.97 162 37.62 0.31 Reach1 16 PF 1 628.00 48.00 51.49 51.5 52.38 0.1292 7.61 83 47.21 1.01 Reach1 17 PF 1 628.00 50.00 54.47 54.67 0.0176 3.60 174 69.53 0.40 Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS= 14 .1 .1 .1 ____, 54 Legend 52 ---WSPF1 --50 Ground g • c 48 Bank Sta 0 ~ > Q) 46 w 44 42 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Station (It) Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS=13 .1 .1-1 54 Legend 52 ---WS PF1 --50 Ground g • c 48 Bank Sta 0 ~ > 46 Q) w 44 42 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Station (It) Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS= 11.5 .1 .1, ~~· Legend 52 ---WSPF 1 -50 Ground ~ ' • c 48 Bank Sta .Q c;; > Q) 46 w 44 42 40 0 10 20 30 40 Station (It) g 5 ~ a; ijj g 5 "" "' > "' ijj g c: g "' > "' ijj Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS = 11 1<--------.1 .1- 52 50 48 46 \ 44 42 40 0 .1 10 .L I ------ 10 Altisma Altisma 20 Station (ft) Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS = 10.5 Culv .1 20 Station (fl) Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS = 10.5 Culv + .1 ---~ -' .1 -' T 'I 7 j 30 ~------------------------.1 -------------------------~J 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 0 5 10 15 20 Station (fl) 40 40 25 Legend INS PF 1 ---Ground __..._ I neff • Bank Sta Legend INS PF 1 Ground ----A- I neff • Bank Sta Legend INS PF 1 Ground • Bank Sta Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS= 10 .1 Jl 52 Legend 50 INS PF 1 48 Ground g • ~ 46 Bank Sta "' > "' 44 w 42 40 38 0 5 10 15 20 25 Station (fl) Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS =9 .1 .1 .1_, 52 Legend 50 INS PF 1 48 Ground g 46 • c: Bank Sta 0 ~ 44 > "' 42 w 40 38 36 0 5 10 15 20 25 Station (fl) Altisma Plan: Prop Cond 2nd Submittal RS =8 .1 .1 .1_, 52 Legend 50 INS PF 1 48 Ground g 46 • c: Bank Sta 0 44 "" "' > "' 42 w 40 38 36 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Station (fl) , l' c: u.. c: CJ) .. c.. i! .... 0> .. ~ ~ c: ...J (!) "' "' 0 "' T ~ 0 .-; .... -r- 0 "' (ij ::::: g .E .0 :J C/) " c N " c 0 (.)~ g a. en 0 c: ecr ... 0 a.. ~ CJ) c "' c:: .-; "' E .~ ~ g , 0 "' ~ ~ ...., t- ~ ~ 0 ~ "' 0 ~ ~ ;1; "' g "' "' ... ... M "' "' (U) uoneAa13 ro :::::: .E .0 :J (/) "0 c N "0 c 0 () a. 0 ..... a.. c co a: co E (/) :;::: <{ H 9~ g~ £~ g· ~ ~ ~~ s·o~ 0~ 6 ~ .r: u <1l Q) 0:: ~ Cii > a 0:: L 9 g 1> £ 0 0 0 0 0 co 0 0 CD 0 0 v 0 0 N ~~~r-.-~--~--~--.-~--~--~r-.-~--~--~~~~--r--.~--~~--r--.~--~~--r-~0 0 L() 0 v 0 ("') L() N g Q) u c <1l u; 0 Q) c c <1l .r: 0 c 'iii ~ APPENDIX D SUBMERGED OUTLET ANALYSES FILE: LineA.WSW SEE PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE A PROFILE IN MAP POCKET W S P G W-CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 1 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 8-6-2015 Time:ll:l3:59 Cascada Verde Tentative Map Storm Drain Line A Preliminary Profile Conceptual Analysis ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert I Station I Elev I -1- L/Elem ICh Slope Depth I (FT) I -1- Water Elev -1- I I Q (CFS) -1- I Vel I (FPS) -1- Vel Head I -I- SF AveJ Energy I Grd.El.l -1- Super JCriticalJFlow TopJHeight/JBase Wtl Elev I Depth I Width IDia.-FTior I.D. I -1--1--1- -1--l- HF ISE DpthJFroude NJNorm Dp "N" I X-Falll ZL -1- ZR !No Wth IPrs/Pip -I !Type Ch *********l*********l********l*********l*********l*******l*******l*********l*******l********l********l*******l*******l***** I******* I 50.000 30.540 -J- 62.000 .0334 I 112.000 32.610 -1- 27.180 .0394 I 139.180 33.680 -1- 64.349 .0658 I 203.529 37.916 -1- I 203.529 37.916 -J- 22.401 .0658 I 225.930 39.390 -J- 50.105 .0834 276.035 43.571 -J- 35.086 .0834 I 311.120 46.498 -1- 19.293 .0834 I 330.413 48.108 -1- 12.943 .0834 I 8.460 -1- 7.473 -I- I 7.025 -1- I 3. 913 -1- .899 -1- .886 -1- .904 -1- .938 -1- .974 -1- I 39.000 -1- I 40.083 -I- I 40.705 -1- I 41.829 -1- I 38.815 -1- I 40.276 -1- 44.475 -1- 47.437 -I- I 49.082 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -1- 26.00 -I- I 8.28 -1- I 8. 28 -I- I 8.28 -1- I 8.28 -1- I 18.99 -I- I 19.36 -1- 18.83 -I- 17.95 -1- 17.12 -I- I 1.06 40.06 -1--J- .0132 .82 I 1.06 41.15 -1--J- .0132 .36 1. 06 41.77 -1--J- .0132 .85 1. 06 -1- I 42.89 -J- HYDRAULIC JUMP I 5.60 44.41 -1--1- .0784 1. 76 I 5.82 46.09 -1--J- .0776 3.89 I 5.51 49.98 -1--J- .0701 2.46 I 5.00 52.44 -1--J- .0617 1.19 I 4.55 53.63 -1--J- .0543 .70 I .00 1.79 -J--1- 8.46 .00 I .00 -J- 7.47 I . 00 -J- 7.03 I . 00 -J- I . 00 -1- 1. 79 -1- . 00 I 1. 79 -I- . 00 I 1. 79 -1- I 1. 79 -1- .90 4.03 I .00 -1- I 1. 79 -1- .89 4.15 I .00 -1- .90 I .00 -1- .94 I . 00 -1- .97 I 1. 79 -1- 3.98 I 1. 79 -I- 3. 71 I 1. 79 -I- 3.46 I .00 -1- 1.15 I .00 -J- 1. 09 I .00 -I- .94 I . 00 -I- 1. 99 -I- .94 1. 99 -I- .88 I 1. 99 -I- .88 I 2.00 -I- .88 I 2.00 -1- .88 I 2.000 -J- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I .00 I .000 -1--J- .00 .00 I .00 I .000 -1--J- .00 .00 I .00 .000 -1--J- .00 .00 I .00 I .000 -1--1- I .000 -1- I .00 -J- .00 .00 I .00 -J- I .000 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 . 00 I .00 -J- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .000 -1- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 1- 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE FILE: LineA.WSW W S P G W -CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 2 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 8-6-2015 Time:ll:l3:59 Cascada Verde Tentative Map Storm Drain Line A Preliminary Profile Conceptual Analysis ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert Station I Elev -1- L/Elem ICh Slope I Depth I I (FT) I -I- Water Elev -I- I I Q (CFS) -I- I Vel I (FPS) -I- Vel Head I -I- SF Ave I Energy I Super ICriticaliFlow TopiHeight/IBase Wtl Grd.El. I Elev I Depth I Width IDia.-FTior I.D. I -1--1--1--1--1--1- ZL -I- INo Wth IPrs/Pip -I HF ISE DpthiFroude NINorm Dp "N" I X-Falll ZR IType Ch *********1*********1********1*********1*********1*******1*******1*********1*******1********1********1*******1*******1***** I******* I 343.356 49.188 -1- 9.474 .0834 I 352.831 49.979 -1- 7.317 .0834 I 360.147 50.589 -1- 5.792 .0834 I 365.940 51.073 -1- 4.678 .0834 I 370.617 51.463 -1- 3.842 .0834 374.460 51.784 -1- 3.164 .0834 I 377.624 52.048 -1- 2.612 .0834 I 380.236 52.266 -1- 2.123 .0834 I 382.359 52.443 -1- 1.737 . 0834 I 1.011 -I- I 1.050 -I- I 1. 090 -I- I 1.133 -I- I 1.179 -I- I 1. 227 -I- I 1. 278 -I- I 1. 332 -I- I 1. 391 -I- I 50.199 -I- I 51.029 -I- I 51.679 -I- I 52. 2 0 6 -I- I 52.642 -I- I 53.011 -I- I 53.326 -I- I 53.598 -I- I 53.834 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- 26.00 -I- I 16.32 -I- I 15.56 -I- 14.84 -I- I 14.15 -I- I 13.49 -I- I 12.8 6 -I- 12.26 -I- I 11.69 -I- I 11.15 -I- I 4.14 54.34 -1--1- .0479 .45 3.76 54.79 -1--1- .0422 .31 I 3.42 55.10 -1--1- .0372 .22 I 3.11 55.31 -1--1- .0329 .15 2.83 55.47 -1--1- .0291 .11 I 2.57 55.58 -1--1- .0258 .08 I 2.33 55.66 -1--1- .0229 .06 2.12 55.72 -1--1- .0203 .04 I 1.93 55.76 -1--1- .0181 .03 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.01 3.22 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.05 3.00 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.09 2.79 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.13 2.59 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.18 2.40 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.23 2.22 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.28 2.06 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.33 1.90 I I .00 1.79 -1--1- 1.39 1.75 2.00 -I- .88 I 2.00 -1- .88 I 1. 99 -1- .88 1. 98 -I- .88 I 1. 97 -I- .88 I 1. 95 -I- .88 I 1. 92 -I- .88 I 1. 89 -I- .88 I 1. 84 -I- .88 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I 2.000 -1- .013 I .000 -I- I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 . 00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .000 -I- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- .000 -I- • 00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 .000 -I- I .000 -I- 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE FILE: LineAoWSW W S P G W -CIVILDESIGN Version 14o06 PAGE 3 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 8-6-2015 Time:ll:l3:59 Cascada Verde Tentative Map Storm Drain Line A Preliminary Profile Conceptual Analysis ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** _Station I Invert I Elev -I- L/Elem ICh Slope I I Depth I (FT) I -I- Water Elev -I- I I Q (CFS) -I- I Vel I (FPS) -I- Vel Head I -I- SF Ave! Energy I Super ICriticaliFlow TopiHeight/IBase Wtl GrdoElo I Elev I Depth I Width IDiao-FTior IoDo I -1--1--1--1--1--1- ZL -I- !No Wth IPrs/Pip -I HF ISE DpthiFroude NINorm Dp "N" I X-Falll ZR !Type Ch *********1*********1********1*********1*********1*******1*******1*********1*******1********1********1*******1*******1***** I******* I 384o096 52o588 -1- 1.346 o0834 I 385o442 52o700 -1- 1.016 o0834 386o458 52o785 -l- o652 o0834 I 387oll0 52o839 -l- o250 o0834 I 387o360 52o860 -I- I 1. 453 -I- I 1. 522 -I- I 1.597 -I- lo683 -I- I 1. 786 -I- I 54o041 -I- 54o222 -I- I 54o382 -I- I 54o522 -I- I 54o646 -I- 26o00 -I- 26o00 -I- 26o00 -I- 26o00 -I- 26o00 -I- I 10o63 -I- I 10ol3 -I- I 9o66 -I- I 9o21 -I- I 8 0 78 -I- I 1.75 55o79 -1--l- o0l62 o02 I 1.59 55o82 -1--1- 00146 oOl I 1.45 55o83 -1--1- 00132 oOl I 1.32 55o84 -1--1- 00122 oOO 1.20 -I- I 55o84 -I- I oOO 1.79 -1--1- 1.45 1.60 I oOO 1.79 -1--1- 1.52 1. 4 6 I I oOO 1.79 -1--1- 1.60 1.31 I I oOO 1.79 -1--1- 1.68 1.17 I oOO -I- I 1. 79 -I- 1. 78 -I- o88 1. 71 -I- o88 1. 60 -I- o88 I 1. 46 -I- o88 I 1. 24 -I- I 2o000 -l- o0l3 I 2o000 -1- 0 013 I 2o000 -1- .013 I 2o000 -l- o013 I 2o000 -I- I oOOO -I- I oOO -1- oOO oOO I oOO -1- oOO oOO I oOO -1- oOO oOO I oOO -1- oOO oOO I oOO -I- I oOOO -I- I oOOO -I- I oOOO -I- I oOOO -I- 1 0 0 I- PIPE I 1 0 0 I- PIPE I 1 oO I- PIPE I 1 0 0 I- PIPE I 1 oO 1- FILE: LineA30.WSW W S P G W -CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 1 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 8-6-2015 Time:ll:l2:50 Cascada Verde Tentative Map Storm Drain Line A Preliminary Profile Conceptual Analysis ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert Station 1 Elev -1- L/Elem JCh Slope I Depth I I (FT) I -1- Water Elev -I- I Q I (CFS) -1- I Vel I (FPS) -I- Vel Head I -I- SF AveJ Energy I Super ICriticalJFlow TopJHeight/IBase Wtl Grd.El. I Elev I Depth I Width IDia.-FTJor I.D. I -1- -1- -1- -1--J- -J- ZL -J- !No Wth JPrs/Pip -I HF JSE DpthiFroude NINorm Dp "N" I X-Falli ZR !Type Ch *********l*********l********l*********l*********l*******l*******l*********l*******l********l********l*******l*******l***** I******* I 50.000 30.540 -1- 62.000 .0334 I 112.000 32.610 -1- 27.180 .0394 I 139.180 33.680 -1- 45.021 .0658 I 184.201 36.643 -I- I 184.201 36.643 -1- 41.729 . 0658 I 225.930 39.390 -1- 36.616 .0834 262.546 42.445 -J- 34.596 .0834 I 297.142 45.332 -J- 21.297 .0834 I 318.439 47.109 -J- 14.938 .0834 I 8.460 -I- I 7.508 -1- I 7.118 -1- 4.967 -1- I 1.125 -1- I l.llO -1- I 1.133 -I- I 1.17 6 -1- I 1. 220 -1- I 39.000 -I- 40.1l8 -I- I 40.798 -I- I 41.610 -1- I 37.768 -I- 40.500 -I- 43.578 -1- I 46.508 -1- I 48.329 -I- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 46.00 -1- 9.37 -I- 9.37 -1- 9.37 -I- 9.37 -1- I 21.48 -I- I 21.84 -I- I 21.25 -I- I 20.26 -I- I 19.32 -I- I 1.36 40.36 -1- -1- .0126 .78 1. 36 41.48 -1- -1- .0126 .34 I 1.36 42.16 -1- -1- .0126 .57 1.36 -I- 42.97 -I- HYDRAULIC JUMP 7.16 -I- I 44.93 -I- .0743 3.10 I 7.41 47.91 -1- -1- .0732 2.68 I 7.01 50.59 -1- -1- .0663 2.29 I 6.38 52.88 -1--J- .0583 1.24 I 5.80 54.13 -1--J- .0513 .77 I I .00 2.24 -1--1- 8.46 I I .00 2.24 -1- -1- 7.51 I I .00 2.24 -1--J- 7.12 I . 00 -1- 2.24 -1- I I .00 2.24 -1- -1- .00 .00 .00 1.12 4.08 I .00 2.24 -1- -1- 1.11 4.18 I I .00 2.24 -1--J- 1.13 4.02 I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.18 3.74 I I .00 2.24 -1--J- 1.22 3.49 I .00 -J- 1. 42 I . 00 -1- 1.35 I .00 -1- 1.16 I .00 -I- I 2.49 -1- 1.16 I 2.48 -1- 1.08 I 2.49 -1- 1.08 I 2.50 -1- 1.08 I 2.50 -1- 1.08 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -J- .013 I 2.500 -J- .013 I 2.500 -1- I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -J- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -J- .013 I .00 I .000 -1--J- .00 .00 I .00 I .000 -1--J- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- I .000 -J- I .000 -J- I .000 -J- I .00 -J- .00 .00 I .00 -J- .00 .00 I .00 -J- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .000 -J- I .000 -1- I .000 -J- I .000 -I- 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 1- 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 .0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 .o I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE FILE: LineA30.WSW W S P G W -CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 2 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 8-6-2015 Time:11:12:50 Cascada Verde Tentative Map Storm Drain Line A Preliminary Profile Conceptual Analysis ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert I Station I Elev I -1- L/Elem [Ch Slope Depth 1 Water (FT) I Elev -1--1- I Q I (CFS) -I- I Vel I (FPS) -I- Vel Head -I- SF Ave[ Energy I Grd.El. I -I- Super [Critical[Flow Top[Height/[Base Wtl Elev I Depth I Width [Dia.-FT[or I.D. I -1--1--1--1--l- HF ISE Dpth[Froude N[Norm Dp "N" I X-Falll ZL -I- ZR [No Wth [Prs/Pip -I [Type Ch *********1*********1********1*********1*********1*******1*******1*********1*******1********1********1*******1*******1***** I******* I 333.377 48.356 -I- ll. 272 . 0834 I 344.649 49.296 -1- 8.797 .0834 I 353.446 50.030 -1- 7.084 .0834 I 360.530 50.621 -1- 5.785 .0834 I 366.315 51.104 -1- 4.776 .0834 I 371.091 51.502 -1- 3.951 .0834 I 375.042 51.832 -1- 3.274 .0834 I 378.315 52.105 -1- 2.691 .0834 I 381.007 52.330 -1- 2.180 .0834 I 1. 267 -I- 1. 315 -I- 1. 367 -I- I 1. 421 -I- I 1. 478 -I- I 1.538 -I- 1.602 -I- 1. 670 -I- 1. 743 -I- I 49.623 -I- I 50. 611 -I- 51.397 -I- I 52.042 -I- I 52.582 -I- I 53.041 -I- 53.434 -I- I 53.775 -I- I 54.073 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- 46.00 -I- I 18.42 -I- I 17.57 -I- I 16.75 -I- I 15.97 -I- I 15.23 -I- I 14.52 -I- I 13.84 -I- I 13.20 -I- I 12.58 -[- I 54.89 -1- .0452 5.27 -I- .51 4.79 -1- .0398 I 55.40 -I- .35 I 4.36 55.75 -1--1- .0352 .25 I 3.96 -I- 56.00 -I- . 0311 .18 I 3.60 56.18 -1--1- .0275 .13 I 3.27 56.31 -1--1- .0243 .10 I 2.97 56.41 -1--1- .0216 .07 I 2.70 56.48 -1--1- .0192 .05 I 2.46 56.53 -1--1- .0171 .04 I I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.27 3.25 I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.32 3.02 .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.37 2.81 I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.42 2.61 I I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.48 2.42 I .00 -I- I 2.24 -1- 2.24 1. 54 .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.60 2.07 I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.67 1.91 I I .00 2.24 -1--1- 1.74 1.76 2.50 -1- 1.08 I 2.50 -1- 1.08 I 2.49 -1- 1.08 I 2.48 -1- 1.08 I 2.46 -1- 1.08 I 2.43 -1- 1.08 I 2.40 -1- 1.08 I 2.35 -1- 1.08 I 2.30 -1- 1.08 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -[- . 013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I 2.500 -1- .013 I I .000 -I- .00 -1- .00 .00 I I .000 -I- .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .00 -1- .00 . 00 I .00 -1- .00 .00 I .000 -I- I .000 -I- . 00 I .000 -I- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- I .000 -I- 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 • 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE I 1 . 0 I- PIPE FILE: LineA30.WSW W S P G W -CIVILDESIGN Version 14.06 PAGE 3 Program Package Serial Number: 1559 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING Date: 8-6-2015 Time:ll:l2:50 Cascada Verde Tentative Map Storm Drain Line A Preliminary Profile Conceptual Analysis ************************************************************************************************************************** ******** I Invert Station I Elev -1- L/Elem ICh Slope I I Depth I (FT) I -1- Water Elev -I- I I Q (CFS) -1- I Vel I (FPS) -I- Vel Head I -I- SF Ave! Energy I Grd.El. I -I- Super ICriticaliFlow TopJHeight/JBase Wtl Elev I Depth I Width IDia.-FTJor I.D. I -1--1--1--J--l- HF ISE DpthiFroude NINorm Dp "N" I X-Falli ZL -J- ZR !No Wth IPrs/Pip -I !Type Ch *********l*********l********l*********l*********l*******l*******l*********l*******l********l********l*******l*******l***** I******* I I I I I I I I I I 383.186 52.512 1. 822 54.334 46.00 12.00 2.24 56.57 .00 2.24 2.22 2.500 .000 .00 1 . 0 -I--1- -1--1--1--1--I--I--1--1--1- -1- -1-1- 1. 721 .0834 .0153 .03 1. 82 1. 61 1. 08 .013 . 00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I I I I I 384.907 52.655 1. 908 54.563 46.00 11.44 2.03 56.60 .00 2.24 2.13 2.500 .000 .00 1 . 0 -I--1- -1--J--1--1--1- -1--I--1--I--1--J-1- 1. 288 .0834 . 0138 .02 1. 91 1. 47 1. 08 .013 .00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I I I 386.196 52.763 2.003 54.766 46.00 10.91 1. 85 56.61 .00 2.24 2.00 2.500 .000 .00 1 . 0 -I--1--I--1--I--1--I--1--1--1--1--J- -J-1- .845 .0834 .0125 .01 2.00 1. 32 1. 08 .013 . 00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I I I 387.041 52.833 2.111 54.944 46.00 10.40 1. 68 56.62 .00 2.24 1. 81 2.500 .000 .00 1 . 0 -I--1--1- -1--I--I--I- -I--1--1--1--J--1-1- .319 .0834 . 0115 .00 2.11 1.17 1. 08 . 013 .00 .00 PIPE I I I I I I I I I I I I I 387.360 52.860 2.242 55.102 46.00 9.91 1. 53 56.63 .00 2.24 1. 52 2.500 .000 .00 1 . 0 -1--I--1--J--I--I--I--1--1- -1--1--1--1-1- 1 tt = 60' ~ 0 60 LEGEND: DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY OVERLAND FLOW PATH 3.62 AC DRAINAGE BASIN AREA ITQJ RATIONAL METHOD NODE NUMBER EXISTING CONDITION RATIONAL METHOD WORK MAP 1" = 60' ~ 0 60 LEGEND: NOTE: PROPOSED STORM DRAINS IN ALTIVA PLACE AND ALTISMA WAY SHALL BE SIZED FOR EXISTING FLOWS IN THESE STREETS DURING FINAL ENGINEERING. THESE SYSTEMS MERELY PASS OFF-SITE FLOWS THROUGH THE SITE. DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY OVERLAND FLOW PATH PROPOSED DRAINAGE F AGILITIES 3.62 AC DRAINAGE BASIN AREA []QJ RATIONAL METHOD NODE NUMBER PROPOSED CONDITION RATIONAL METHOD WORK MAP ..... -.....; ',~<<o. !... .. "-" ~ ',J,,~'o ............ ~ -- --w -- jff <<o,r / I -w:Ll- ---'"' I I ~ L ..... ·'iiJ 1-- \ I I \ I I \ \ \ : I ~ '· /1 u.' I <.,< " \ \ ,..,~"""> mon 1 \ ~~ 'p~a;.;;. #-,r---'t\E~OV o~ lk?~-~~~~~--.---~I til v ~-i~-k-~~ • -~--~rJ4U~ I \.'~~--~~ 'i'f'\\ \ \ E~· /' . '11-'!.\ I I f_cl'~~,;o.--' .. .">'iL a -~ -~· .Jj .u.~J ! f ~ ... ~ ::J"-rm-r:i -~--':= m--'1\ ~ ' \ I I I /~ ................... ~~-..... -..--"' \ \ \ \ \'~ \ '( \ \ ~ • /\ ' ' ·v _. ,.., ' \ \\/ ) \ "'/ ~-- . I \ '\ -IIi.;~\ / ./ \ \ _..( \ / ~\\~+. .... \· '\.:.{\I --<,/ . \..'>..•"' , ~ \,\ -:/ \\\ l. ""\ y ~.8. ~.116 !_ ) ~ftJ(j / \ \\ """" <./ \ .\ "' ~ ""',~ \ \ ' .... " ' / / I ··< ' ~-"". //A,""" -. Af ~•9o .· -~. , ~. ""' _,,x; , -·v"~ _/, \ '\~: ""'" ~ \ 'i.. ~.9< I / .... v-... 'l. j' ' ~.Sit ~.98 ~' / ~-t·' / ...___~I rJ + / '-... .' 1 ~ ' J ':1 ~:' .... j7 . ! '~~-~:_1-) (~ ( ~.J~ ~•Js / ~.JJ ".._ I ./ ~•<o / / I J >.,,~ 7.,< JO' 30' : ~F 60' r to' zo· • I' 20' ro· : I· ·I · • · I ·I 7JI!O 7376 \ t,Q. \}: , I I 7372, :1 l 1 _I I -J~ \, , / , 0 ~J / I ~ ' .... 'C~ / \ I '\ / / / / / / / ..... -;'" ,<:;'- / i~ ··~ ~~ i l~ !~n ~~ ~~ ~ 8 I ~ . a+ f i E Q ~~~o I .. h l:o h-r ~ ~~! ~~! ~ .-----------------,~ z >-<C a:_J <(D... zo ~z _JQ W<( a: a: a...o &: 011/-,_ tU* oM.- ~ ~ r .,. ~ <.> ~ 0 6~ 60 56 52 ~8 ~~ ~0 36 32 28 2~ 20 16 G::ll ~ al I If= 39.00 --mwrn PERIOD-- \ \ I I '\ i DAYlJGUT \J ~-- PROP. RIPRAP ~ ~I 0 o>-<q &~~ Q:~ll Q..O!!:/ PROPOSED 62.00 LF 2~· ~CP SO 0 3.32% S s 8~ ~~10 +Vl--oo ~&; Vl2:et: s e?~ ~~ .... +Vl~ -o-··&.,.. ~Q:~ tnQ..Q: PROP. 27.18 LF 2~· RCP SO 0 J.9~% s PROPOSED 86. 75 LF 24" RCP SO 0 6.58% S ~ ~ ~ ---- ---------- __......------------<. GRADE AT SO LINE PROPOSED 161.41 LF 24" RCP SO 0 8.~% S :X: ~~--->- " 00 ..... ?t~~i~ '"IQIOC\j ··&~'l?~ ~2:~~~ .--- __..---- ...- -------- ...-...-...- ...-...- ..-:-;;ReP p£R ....-(j. 2~ ,7oA· o'IIG· NO· """r::/EV~Ir---------.-~1 -~-r---1 ------.----~1 -~.------1 -----.---~1 ---.------il -------.----~1 --,-------,~1 al 0+00 1+00 2+00 PROFILE PUBLIC SD LINE "A" RELOCATION HOR. SCALf 1"=20' VER. SCALE 1·-~· J+OO HOO 6~ 60 56 52 ~8 H ~0 36 32 ' ~ -~---=~---'..:::::F·---i -~-= J.~--·· + -· eves EcTVE!Y PR.Or"ll-e SCA/..6 HQe:/",20' va-.e .-r-4 ' NOTE: fXIST/NG /M , rt. Wlf!AJ'tfi:t%!11j ;e~e 'A ~Yl~ ~7 -L. ••. ~."T;1 v;:JLL ,c·t, ,, . ~-r u:.'!T Iii•? -• -· .:J T.!V.~ 2&.'6' . . I I ' . I I .JT ' II ij i I . ! ··--. I i I .J !---t-l-~bt~ RENARKS 23/ 230 ~ ~ C29 : ~g ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~ * : .. -· . • if<~ f!OTE.· ;nr o ' • •· --' >>IHVT .. "-' BY~BEIJt:-: -.; · ~~ > <• •~--"' %ff/OEJJ-J'{2flf"";; ~ 'ffdff"l':.!':tl'""' '> "f 'S/T/0/Y APPI<OX. LOC. UNOERG" o .. ,~gj,~ 4> me. awu • .uNO v,_ ,. ""'•,;,w%ii '" .um ca q" ~-- Lo r No 1 """m" m cxA<r ;l:>-"< .-t' ~' " IO"A.C.P. ~ g !ll~!<l ¥ €1~~ u · "~!Q ~ i;f~~ ·" ~§~ ' - ,~~ 4J Ut/RI/£ · II) 0~ ~:'%0/J'~ ~~~~ l.•f78.Ga' '</~~ ~~ t. • .:l. ,, . ~t ;M_C.O.STA iN' i I scp.1.J . ! ;, .. ~sri I I I iJf ; ' ;.., TRASH f~Ct:. O~TAII- NOT 1'0 ~~oot.- BENCH MARK IIESCRIPTIOH; CHISLED SQUARE ON CONCRETE CUR6 LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF BRIDGE ABOVE WPA HARK ON LA COSTA ROAD 85', WEST OF EL CA/IIINO REAL r,:--·--':.._ .. ··--~--------· ENGINEER OF WORK 0:&.(?. ~£?£. WILLIAM B. RIC:i?:.£.9416 R£CORD FROif: COUNTY BENCH LEVELS NO . 0C 102 . · -.------.... --. . ELEVATION: 17.770 DATUN : U.S.C. a G.S. . _ -_., 'PfnVA'TE COiiiTRACf\. ~1 -~-'T--~1 · -· r==fLUICITY,~2f-~~~BAD 1~ ~--.. --PLANS FOR THE 11"11-'KVVt..Mt:.N I Ul:" • Alicantf> Road Alfil Way and Candil Way (AucANTE IN CARLSBAD TRACT 72-25 HILLS) "A58UILT" TE'lBY I kf'VISIONS lA PP'D \ <!\=.a _ _,. IR.17Nte7 :1~----··-·---~---· -=~(l -· 1 !JQJ ELH ;.evE. CARLsBAD CA.LIF.t201» ·11-c:Q , f .. . ' . --' .J 9 I .. 4 I I PioniL~ 7 I VO!O ' SECTION c-c ~<oscAu STA 2188 1D STA ~tiS.TI i'-<i' /06A,I/05A WillE MESH RIENFO/lCING -- SECtiON 8 -8 ..6QZ..lli STA ~~88 NOTE: STA lllc 1D ~88 1D BE SMOOTH TllAN61T/ON FROM SEC. .A-A 1D SEC. 8·8 tr·III'NT.8CNO 1 HMirdll£/lT W/TNilVST 8lK NOTE : CHANNEL TO 8£ CONSTilUCTEQ TQ SAN IJI£60 COUNTY IJEPAilTMENT OF SANITATION I FLOOD CONTKOL STANQAI?Q DRAWING NO FC·S·! UNLESS I<OT£0 01< (}€TAIL LOT#/ !Pr-:!P zt J'c 0'(, = --- ' '\ . ' 1-1 1-I I ! I I ! t • I I ·1 !-++-+-t • ·I ! I I I . I . HO. It\\ /1:', I~ I~ N.. 1171. ~ ~ EASEMENT OA A OELTA OR BRG. A•n'ZO'!li!' N'-8 ~·OO'f A••W-tO'It' ... 'OCT 4·15V~'-40' 4•!)Y~ 00' IN lot> V->'00'1! A•~&I'Z&' N I!B'Ot>'IB'W Nlle"O&'ZlS'W N ~ ~ .., RADIUS I OCT t1'5.!'>0' rc · ~· tt>/.50' 10' LENGTH RCIIARKS ~.,.,. nt..t~· t O!!,_,. !lOoz· Il l. 77' ~:;+· t<'l V .!li!' !i14.~' "''~-~· - SECTION 0-0 NOTTOSCALt CEI<TER /l!ENF IN SLAB. CHA [., lonu lll!aG ~~ . '.SY~4'b . , l'l . WA 110. OELT A 011 8116. llB'~OO'W (Z NI'I-'4<1-'00'W ~'50' 4 ~ b) NO SC.AU IINEL DATA fiJDIUS LEIItiTH f.tJ.<.JU XV' ~w t:::R DATA RADIUS LEJfGTH ZZ3.7'?1 "--.H' 1~04' f"tBe II(IIIJIKS riC · j . . . . I li l IIDIAIIffS f2•A.C l -~ ' . . l ~ JOB N~_jW,._ (f) :r:)> fTlZ 0 I~ ~)> (f);() ~0 00 ::;oU> 7': s:o )>;o -urrl rrl /\: __. GJ :::::0 z 0 oJ> I lJ I -II 0 (.N 0 0 ., fTl fTl -l GRAPHIC SCALE 0 60 I I 1 INCH = 60 FEET / ON-SITE HEC-RAS WORK MAP